JUDGMENT
S. Ranganathan
1. The assessed-respondent in this case, Shri R. Dalmia, has subsequently died. However, a vakalatnama has been presented to this court on behalf of the executors and the legal representatives of the late Shri R. Dalmia. We direct in the circumstances that the name of Shri R. Dalmia be substituted by the names of the various persons mentioned in the annexure to the vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent. The cause title may be amended as Smt. Saraswati Dalmia and others in place of Shri R. Dalmia.
2. The question referred to this court in this income-tax reference which relates to the assessment year 1960-61 is in the following terms :
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in treating the municipal valuation as the annual letting value of the properties, No. 3, Sikandra Road and No. 9, Mansingh Road, New Delhi ?”
3. Both counsel agree that the same question in relation to the assessment year 1961-62 has been disposed of by a Bench of this court. This was ITR No. 103 of 1974 which was disposed of on 16th December, 1981, by another Division Bench of this court. Learned counsel for the Department also points out that the point at issue is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sheila Kaushish [1981] 131 ITR 435. In these circumstances, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favor of the assessed. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.
4. We may add just for the purposes of record that this reference comes up before us by way of a supplemental statement in relation to ITR No. 32 of 1970, which has also been disposed of by this court on November 5, 1981. But there is no connection between the questions raised in ITR No. 32 of 1970 and the present reference.