1998 (1) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he circumstances of the case and in view of sub-rule (i) of rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order directing that the value of the shares of Hapjan Purbat Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. and in respect of the assessee's holding should be valued as per the stock exchange quotation of the value of shares of the said private limited company when such shares were not regularly quoted in any stock exchange? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not accepting the appeal preferred by the appellant on the ground that the appellant could not have been able to show that the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commiss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sioner who noted that the facts of the case were similar to those of the appeal of Ramgopal Mahesh Kumar decided on July 25, 1981. He also noted that the assessee belonged to the same group. Following the same line of reasoning, he held that the shares in the case of this assessee should also be valued in accordance with the quotations on the stock exchange. The same contention as noted above was reiterated by the Department but it was not accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal referring to its earlier order dated August 27, 1982, in the case of Smt. Sita Devi Saharia being W. T. A. No. 59 (Gau) of 1981 passed between the parties, and also in another connected appeal being W. T. A. No. 60 (Gau) of 1981, directed the Wealth-tax Officer to va....