Wealth tax---

----Reference---Death of assessee--No steps taken to place on record legal representatives or accountable person---Reference at instance of assessee dismissed for default and for not taking necessary steps---Indian Wealth Tax Act 1957 S.27.

If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the Court is not bound to answer the reference.

The Court accordingly dismissed as in default the reference made at the instance of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had expired a long time ago and no one had taken appropriate steps.

B.R. Phosphate v. CST M.C.Cs. Nos.303 and 304 of 1986 and Jamunadas v. CST (1993) 38 MPLJ 462 (MP) fol.

Nemo for the Assessee.

D.D. Vyas for the Commissioner.

JUDGMENT

A.R. TIWARI, J.---At the instance of the applicant (executor of the will), the Tribunal has stated the case and referred the undernoted question of law on applications registered as Revision Appeals Nos. 109 to 113/(Ind) of 1990 arising out of the order, dated January 17, 1990, passed by the Tribunal in Wealth Tax Appeals Nos.84 to 88/(Ind) of 1989 for the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1982-83 and 1983-84 under

section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 for short, "the Act", for our opinion:

"Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the benefit of section 7(4) is not available to an executrix-asses see who was assessed in a representative capacity, who was also the sole legatee and who continued to live in the building for which the said benefit was claimed?"

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the net wealth of the estate of the deceased Maharaja Holkar of Indore was assessed in the hands Sharmisthabai Holkar as executrix of the will of the deceased 16(3) read with section 19-A of the Act. Maharaja Tukojirao pass away in 1978. He left a will under which the assessee, namely, Smt. was the sole legatee and beneficiary who lived all along in the covered under the will. The assessee claimed benefit of section 7(4) of the Act which was negatived by the Wealth Tax Officer (Annexures "A-I" to "A-V"). The assessee then filed the appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who accepted the plea of the assessee and allowed the benefit (Annexure "P"). The Department then filed the appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit (Annexure "C"). The assessee then filed applications under section 27( 1) of the Act The Tribunal stated the case and referred the aforesaid question of law.

None appeared for the applicant/assessee, Shri D.D. Vyas, learned counsel appeared for the non-applicant/Department and submitted that the assessee, sole legatee and beneficiary died long back and no steps have been taken to place on record the legal representatives of the accountable person. He, therefore; submitted that this Court may decline to answer the question a, no steps have been taken to Enable the hearing, of this case.

As held in Jamunadas v. CST (1993) 38 MPL 462 (MP) and the common order passed in Miscellaneous Civil Case No.303 of 1986---B.R. Phosphate v. CST and Miscellaneous Civil Case No.304 of' 1986 --- B.R. Phosphate v. CST by this Court on November 6, 1995, this Court is not bound to a4wer the reference. In Jamunadas v. CST 1993 38 MPL 462, it is held as under:

"For the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that if the party at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, this Court is not bound to answer to the reference. We refuse to answer the reference and also saddle the assessee with the costs of the Department quantified at Rs.150."

As the assessee has expired and no one has taken the appropriate steps, we dismiss this reference. in default and for not taking necessary steps. The Tribunal be informed accordingly.

M.B.A./1343/FCReference dismissed.