JUDGMENT
S.K. Keshote, J.
1. On the application of the Revenue filed under Section 27(3) of the WT Act, 1957, the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, has referred the following question for our opinion:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in upholding the decision of the AAC that in the case of residential properties Rule 1BB being procedural, would apply to asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1977-78, even prior to 1st April, 1979?”
The matter arises out of the WT Appeal No. 90/Jp/1986, asst. yr. 1975-76.
2. The learned counsel for the Revenue advanced manifold contentions but we are satisfied that the Rule 1BB is procedural and, therefore, it has a retrospective effect. Looking to this nature of the provision being a procedure would equally apply to all pending assessments and the learned Tribunal is thus not incorrect in its approach.
3. In the case of CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons (1994) 210ITR 886 (SC), their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court held this rule is procedural having retrospective effect. We do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Tribunal.
4. As a result of the aforesaid discussion we answer the question referred by the learned Tribunal for our opinion in affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. This reference accordingly stands disposed of.
