JUDGMENT
By The Court
1. The petitioner had sought reference of the following three questions :
“1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in reducing the value of 1/5th share of property at 7/184, Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur from Rs. 2,31,400 to Rs. 50,000 ?
2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in directing for taking value of shares of M/s. Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. at Nil by applying yield method and not following provisions of r. 1E of the WT Rules, 1957 ?
3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 41,818 on account of the refunds due to the assessed for various assessment years by holding that these assets were not belonging to The assessed on the relevant valuation date ?”
2. In view of our order for an earlier year, notice was not issued in respect of question No. 1 because it had been held in WTC 96/89 vide order dt. 20th August, 1990 that the petition with regard to such a question be consigned to record and could be revived if in respect to the asst. yr. 1971-72 the value of the house in question is revised.
3. As regards question No. 2, it is no doubt true that it relates to interpretation of rule 1E; but r. 1E was similar to r. 1D which was the subject-matter of a decision of this Court in the case of Sharbati Devi Jhalani vs. CWT (1986) 159 ITR 549 (Del). In view of the aforesaid decision the answer to question No. 2 has become self-evident.
4. In our opinion question No. 3 is a question of law and, therefore, we direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the aforesaid question No. 3 to this Court.
5. There will be no order as to costs.