IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CEA No.64 of 1995 Date of Decision:-6.4.2010 Commissioner of Wealth-Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Petitioner Versus Raj Kumar Bansal, M/s Lifo International, Karnal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.K.K.Mehta, Sr.Standing Counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondent. Ashutosh Mohunta, J. (Oral) In this case, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for adjudication by this Court:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law to hold that assessee's share in cash incentive, duty draw back claims of the firm was not includible in the net wealth of the assessee?” After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we recall the order dated 11.3.2010 for the reasons recorded in the order dated 30.3.2010 as question of law raised in Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Patiala v. Mrs.Poonam Gupta, Ludhiana, WTC No.30 of 1990, decided on 24.4.2006 was entirely different than the question raised in the present reference. A perusal of the facts of this case shows that the same very question of law as referred in the present case has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in WTR No.3 of 2006 titled as “The Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Haryana, Rohtak vs. Smt.Kamal Saroj, Mahajan House, Panipat” decided on 29.3.2010. In view of the above, the present reference is decided in the same terms as in Smt.Kamal Saroj's case (supra). (Ashutosh Mohunta) Judge (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge 6.4.2010 AS