TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1005X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been raised in the given case. Question Nos.1 and 2, relating to valuation of the asset in issue, in the present case are pure questions of fact. In view of the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate that the two questions are required to be answered in favour of the assessee and against Revenue. - Referred Case No.172 of 1996 - - - Dated:- 10-12-2013 - G. Chandraiah And Challa Kodanda Ram,JJ. For the Applicant : Sri S. R. Ashok Learned Senior Counsel Assisted by Sri Sasidhar Reddy For the Respondent : Sri. S. Ravi, Learned Senior Counsel ORDER (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice G.Chandraiah) As per the Orders of the Division Bench of this Court dated 09.11.1995 in W.T.C.Nos.26 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the said appeal by following its own order for the assessment years 1980-81 and 81-82, which was reported in Wealth Tax Officer Vs. Trustees of HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust 35 ITD 402, paragraph 106 of the said order, the Tribunal has recorded its opinion that the 1st appellate authority has correctly made a deduction for adjustment on account of uncertainities, hazards and risk of litigation. The Tribunal also has referred to the factum of joint ownership, cumulative burden of tax liabilities and various other uncertainities and held that the valuation adopted by the Departmental Valuer was rightly reduced by 50% on account of these depressing factors, justifying such reduction of 50% in valuation. 03. Heard the learned Senior Coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to those contentions and recorded an omnibus finding at paragraph 106. We do not find the discussion and conclusion vis--vis the particular depressing factors pointed out by the assessee. There is no specific finding whether any or all of those factors did exist, how far they were relevant and if so, to what extent they go to reduce the valuation." 06. On the other hand, Sri S.Ravi, learned Senior Counsel for the assessee would submit that the Tribunal has merely followed its earlier orders for the Assessment Years 1980-81 and 81-82. He would point out that the said order remained unchallenged, whereunder after considering the material on record and material placed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that redu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether the issue relating to the reduction of 50% in valuation of the asset can be challenged. Insofar as the Order of this Court in WTC Nos.26 and 29 of 1994 is concerned, we should not lose sight of the fact that they were made in the context of calling the Tribunal to refer the questions of law said to arise from the orders of the Tribunal. While dealing with an application seeking to call for the reference of a question of law said to be arising from an order of the Tribunal, the opinion expressed in a prima facie view and the examination of the order of the Tribunal is only for the purpose of coming to a conclusion about whether a Question of law arises or not? As a matter of fact, consideration by the Court at that stage is perfunctor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e merits of the question. We see no basis for the said apprehension. It is obvious that the reasons given in the order questioned herein are merely the reasons for directing the reference and do not amount to expression of the opinion on the merits of the questions." 13. We are completely in agreement with the Judgments cited supra 1 and 2 wherein it has been held that merely because a reference was called for under Section 256(2) at a later stage, observations made at that stage are not conclusive and not binding on the Court while answering the reference. In that view of the matter, the observations made by this Court while calling for reference of the questions in WTC No.40 of 1994 are only prima facie in nature and this Court while an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
