IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MA No.474 of 2006
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MUZAFFARPURMUZAFFARPUR
............................... APPELLANT
Versus
DWARIKA NATH JHA ( TRUSTEE) RESIDUARY ESTATE OF LATE
MAHARAJADHIRAJ KAMESHWAR SINGH.. ...DARBHANGA
.............................. RESPONDEN
-----------
5 27-1-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the
order under appeal dated 21-7-2006 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in WTA Nos.56-59/Pat/2004
relating to assessment years 95-96 to 98-99.
The learned Tribunal has gone by the definition of the term `
assets’ as contained in the Finance Act 1992 for giving a finding that
some of the assets were not covered by the definition. There is no scope
to take a different view in the matter.
The next issue raised before us is whether it was proper to
remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for determining the value of
the various assets in accordance with valuation rules which are in
Schedule-III of the Act and have to be followed as per Section 7 of the
Act. We do not find that this issue raises any substantial question of
law.
As a result this appeal is dismissed.
( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)
Naresh ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)
2