IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.474 of 2006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MUZAFFARPURMUZAFFARPUR …………………………. APPELLANT Versus DWARIKA NATH JHA ( TRUSTEE) RESIDUARY ESTATE OF LATE MAHARAJADHIRAJ KAMESHWAR SINGH.. …DARBHANGA ………………………… RESPONDEN ----------- 5 27-1-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order under appeal dated 21-7-2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in WTA Nos.56-59/Pat/2004 relating to assessment years 95-96 to 98-99. The learned Tribunal has gone by the definition of the term ` assets’ as contained in the Finance Act 1992 for giving a finding that some of the assets were not covered by the definition. There is no scope to take a different view in the matter. The next issue raised before us is whether it was proper to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for determining the value of the various assets in accordance with valuation rules which are in Schedule-III of the Act and have to be followed as per Section 7 of the Act. We do not find that this issue raises any substantial question of law. As a result this appeal is dismissed. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) 2