HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM Referred Case No. 130 of 1996 JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Challa Kondanda Ram) This case is referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this Court on certain questions of law proposed by the Revenue and the assessee for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions are referred: 1) Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in allowing exemption under S.5(1)(xii) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of 7 items of jewellery claimed to represent art treasures? 2) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the notional Estate Duty liability likely to arise on the demise of the life tenant was allowable as a deduction while valuing the remainder-men’s interest? At the instance of the assessee, the following questions are referred: 1) Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the validity of the initiation of proceedings under S.17(1)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957? 2) Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, any part of the value of the assets held by the assessee Trust is liable to be taxed under the provisions of S.21(1A) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957? All the above referred questions are arising in the case of the same assessee. Sri S.R.Ashok, learned senior counsel for the Revenue and Sri Ch.Ravindra, learned counsel for the assessee submit that question No.1 proposed by the Revenue is covered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee in view of the judgment reported in Commissioner of Wealth Tax v SB. Zainab Noorul Sayeeda and Others[1] and question No.2 proposed by the Revenue is covered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee in view of the judgment reported in Commissioner of Wealth Tax v Trustee of H.E.H. the Nizams’ Jewellery Trust[2]. Likewise, question Nos.1 and 2 proposed by the assessee are covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee in view of the judgment reported in H.E.H. The Nizam’s Jewellery Trust v Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-Tax and Others[3]. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and in the light of the judgments referred to above, we answer the questions against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Reference is answered. _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J 31.10.2013 ______________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM,J bcj [1] (2003) 262 ITR 306 (A.P.) [2] (2003) 261 ITR 690 (SC) [3] (1997) 227 ITR 52 (A.P)