MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX REFERENCE NO.11 OF 1998 Commissioner of Wealth Tax ..Applicant Vs. Shri J.M. Yagnik ....Respondent Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the Applicant. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED: 13th February, 2009 DATED: 13th February, 2009 DATED: 13th February, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The learned Tribunal has referred the following question for consideration:- "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that Schedule III to the Wealth-tax Act will be applicable retrospectively and all the pending assessments are covered by the directives of Schedule III, whereas Schedule III to the Wealth-tax Act is relevant for the purpose of Sec.7(1) of the Act, which is a substantive provision and was inserted w.e.f. 1/4/89 and, therefore, should apply to A.Y. 89-90 and onwards without appreciating: A) that the valuation of the properties was determined as per valuation made by the valuation officers. B) that the valuation made by the Valuation Officer is binding on the Assessing Officer and C) that the rule under Schedule III of the W.T. Act have come into effect from 1.4.1989 i.e. for and from A.Y. 1989-90 and are not applicable to the assessment year under appeal." . The issue is answered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs. Sharvan Kumar Swarup Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs. Sharvan Kumar Swarup Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons, 210 ITR 886 & Sons, 210 ITR 886 & Sons, 210 ITR 886. Considering the above the issue answered in the affirmative in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)