1989 (8) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e High Court any question of law which arises out of an order passed under section 24 or under section 26 of the Wealth-tax Act. In the present case, the order dated 29-8-1988 is an order passed by the Tribunal under section 35(1)(e) of the Wealth-tax Act and if that was so, how an application under section 27(1) would lie against this order. The question we posed before him was whether the order dated 29-8-1988 was an order under section 24 of the Act or an order traceable to section 35 of the Act and hence a miscellaneous order passed on a miscellaneous application. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee relied upon a decision of the Allahabad High Court in Chemicals & Allied Products v. ITAT [1989] 175 ITR 344 for the proposition tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n order under section 35 is expressly excluded from the application of section 27. The authorities cited by the learned counsel for the assessee are, therefore, distinguishable and are of not much assistance in deciding this issue, as they deal with section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and not with the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act. 4. In this connection, it is useful to refer to the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Under the said Act, the Tribunal was to make a reference to the High Court under section 66(1) of the said Act. The main order which the Tribunal passed on an appeal was under section 33(4) of the said Act. An order for rectification could be passed by the Tribunal under section 35(2) of the said Act. The Punj....