1998 (3) TMI 75

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Revenue is as follows : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding and had valid materials to hold that the provisions of section 17(1)(b) of the Act could not be validly invoked in the assessee's case and hence the assessment has to be cancelled ?" The assessee is an individual. The assessment year with which we are con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Rs. 2,70,000. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner' cancelled the reassessment for the assessment year 1976-77 on the ground that the audit objection could not be construed as information within the meaning of section 17(1)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act. The Appellate Tribunal, on the appeal preferred by the Department, came to the conclusion that the Wealth-tax Officer has applied his mind to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Wealth-tax Officer after applying his mind to the value of the property, arrived at the value of the property in the original assessment in a proceeding subsequently, initiated under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act. He also submitted that if rule 11313 of the Wealth-tax Rules is applied to determine the value of the property, the value o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n would be arrived at on the basis of the statutory rules, Learned counsel for the Revenue has not disputed this position of law, under rule 1B13 the value of the property has to be determined on the statutory formula. The Supreme Court has held that it would apply to all pending proceedings, and if that rule is applied, the value of the property returned to be determined by applying the provision....