Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963)‑‑‑

‑‑‑‑S. 35‑‑‑Rectification of mistake ‑‑‑Evidence‑‑‑Assessee contended that complete evidence furnished at the time of hearing of appeals escaped consideration by the Appellate Tribunal which being mistake apparent from the record was liable to be rectified under, S.35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Order passed by the Appellate Tribunal needed to be rectified under S.35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 as no finding had been given on such documents specifically furnished during the course of hearing of appeal‑‑‑Order was recalled and appeals were restored to their original‑numbers by the Appellate Tribunal.

Zia Haider Rizvi for Appellant. None for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 25th January, 2003

JUDGMENT

RASHEED ‑AHMAD SHEIKH (JUDICIAL MEMBER).‑‑‑1. Through these miscellaneous applications pertaining to assessment years 1993‑94 to 1995‑96 whereby consolidated, order ' of this Tribunal recorded in W.T.As. Nos.842 to 844/LB of 1999, dated 31‑10‑2000 has been sought to be rectified under section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963.

2. It‑has been stated that the learned Members of the Tribunal have not discussed the gist of the evidence on the point of division of property through gift deed, dated 21‑4‑1992 in which the owner of the property had divided the shares in favour of his legal heirs according to the map incorporated in the Gift Deed. Also there is positive evidence on record about the partition of the property in the shape of gift deed PT‑1 Form issued in the year, 2000‑2001 and bills of electricity meters in the name of each owner, separate rent deeds, and the certificate of Municipal Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Multan. All the above mentioned evidence is a sufficient proof of the division of the property among the co‑sharer, therefore, the status of the petitioner was wrongly assigned as an AOP by the Bench instead of declared status that of an individual. Further contended by the learned AR that the Tribunal had also not taken cognizance of the order passed by the Member Judicial C.B.R: in the preceding year i.e. 1992‑93 whereby status of the applicant was accepted as an individual after appreciation of the facts of the case in its entirety. Nothing has been narrated by‑the Bench to dismantle those facts. In the end it is prayed that since complete evidence which was furnished at the time of hearing of appeal escaped consideration by the Bench and this being mistake apparent from ‑the record, therefore, the order passed by the learned Tribunal in this case may kindly be rectified under section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963. However, none prosecuted on behalf of the department to oppose this application despite proper service of can notice effected at the concerned quarters.

3. After having heard the learned AR's arguments and on going through the appeal record we are clearly of the view that the order passed by this Tribunal need to be rectified under section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 as no finding has been given on such documents specifically furnished documents during the course of hearing of appeal proceedings. Consequently, the order, dated supra is recalled and the appeals are restored to their original numbers. Accordingly the AR (Roster) is directed to enlist the appeals for rehearing in third week of March, 2003.

The miscellaneous applications succeed accordingly

C.M.A./340/Tax (Trib.) Applications accepted.