1980 (9) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... court for its opinion in W.T. Refs. Nos. 1 and 3 of 1971 [Col. H. H. Sir Harinder Singh Bray Bans Bahadur v. CWT [1975] 98 ITR 458 (P & H) ], which pertain to the assessment year 1964-65. Questions Nos. 1 and 2 stand answered by an order of the Bench, dated 20th November, 1973. As regards question No. 3 which is in the following terms, supplementary statement of the case was sent for : " (3) Whether the valuation of gold could be taken at any value other than the rates fixed by, the Gold Control Order ?" In W.T. Refs. Nos., 2 and 7 of 1971, which pertain to the assessment year 1965-66, question No. 1 was answered by this court on 20th November, 1973, but regarding question No. 2, which is in the following terms, a supplementary state....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n referred to this court for its opinion. As is clear from the supplementary statement of the case, the Defence of India Rules, 1962, were amended and, Part XII-A which is headed the, Gold Control, was added on 9th January, 1963. The said Part contained rr. 126A to 126Z. Rule 126H contained provisions putting restrictions on the possession and sale of gold. It has been contended by Shri Puri, the learned counsel for the assessee, that in view of the provisions of the Rules contained in rr. 126A to 126Z, the assessee was not in a position to dispose of the gold bullion in open market, and, therefore, the WTO erred in assessing the value of the gold bullion at the market rate. It has been contended that in view of the restrictions containe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lished by the Government agencies during the relevant time, was the black market rate of the gold, is without any merit. The only other contention raised by the learned counsel for the assessee is that the assessee's application made before the Tribunal when the case went back to it for sending the supplementary statement of the case, for summoning an official of the Finance Ministry for getting the information regarding the prevalent value of 24 ct. gold during the relevant time, has been wrongly rejected by the Tribunal. We are unable to agree with this Contention as well. We do not find any relevance for summoning the said record. The Tribunal in pursuance of the directions of this court vide order dated 20th November, 1973, was asked....