Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the amended provisions of s. 20A of the WT Act would not be applicable to the partitions made on 9th Feb., 1979, in relation to the asst. yr. 1979-80 ?

High Court Of Madras

Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. G. Ramaswamy & Ors.

Sections WT 27(3), WT 20A

Asst. Year1979-80

Ratnam & Bakthavatsalam, JJ.

TCP Nos. 210 to 212 of 1987

21st February, 1989

Counsel Appeared

C.V. Rajan, for the Applicant : Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Respondent

RATNAM, J.:

Under s. 27(3) of the WT Act, 1957, the Revenue seeks a direction to the Tribunal to refer the following common question of law for the opinion of this Court :

“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the amended provisions of s. 20A of the WT Act would not be applicable to the partitions made on 9th Feb., 1979, in relation to the asst. yr. 1979-80 ?”

2. The question is whether the amended provisions of s. 20A of the WT Act would be applicable in respect of the partition dt. 9th Feb., 1979, in relation to the asst. yr. 1979-80. Though in the earlier portion of s. 20A of the WT Act, partial partitions, which have taken place after 31st Dec., 1978, would also be included, yet, by reason of the circular of the CBDT No. 281 of 1980 [See (1981) 131 ITR (St) 4], it had been clarified that even though s. 20A of the WT Act had come into force w.e.f. 1st April, 1980, the provisions thereof would be applicable in relation to the asst. yr. 1980-81 and the subsequent years and not to the earlier assessment years. We are concerned in these cases with the asst. yrs. 1979-80 and even according to the circular of the Board referred to earlier, the amended provisions of s. 20A cannot be made applicable to the assessees in respect of the asst. yr. 1979-80. In that view, the Tribunal was quite right in declining to refer the question of law. We are also of the view that no referable question of law arises for consideration out of the order of the Tribunal. These petitions are, therefore, dismissed. No costs.

[Citation : 185 ITR 285]

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security