IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.447 OF 2004 The Commissioner of Wealth Tax ..Appellant V/s. Shri Nusli N.Wadia ..Respondent ---- Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Ms.Beena Pillai i/by D.M.Harish & Co. for the respondent. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 26.02.2008. PC 1. A.O. had taken a view that M/s.Sterling International Agency Pvt. Ltd. (SIAL) a company incorporated in Nepal was sham and that the shares held by the SIAL should be valued at the hands of the respondent-assessee. This was for the assessment year 1984-85. Appeal was preferred before CIT(A). In appeal, it was held that there was no evidence or material to hold that SIAL at Nepal was sham and further finding that since the assessee was a non-citizen the assets of SIAL at Nepal could not be included in its net wealth in terms of Section 6 of the Wealth Tax Act. 2. Revenue aggrieved, preferred an appeal. The findings of CIT(A) were confirmed by the Tribunal. : 2 : In the assessment year 1990-91 the Tribunal vide its order dated 31.12.2001 following the decision of the Tribunal for the assessment year 1989-90 deleted the addition of dividend income earned in the name of SIAL. The Tribunal following that order held that CIT(A) rightly directed the A.O. to exclude the value of shares of Bombay Dyeing belonging to SIAL from the net wealth of the assessee. The finding whether transaction is sham, is clearly a finding of fact. Once the finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) has been confirmed by the Tribunal and secondly finding has been recorded that the assessee being a non citizen the assets of SIAL in Nepal could not be included in its net wealth, in our opinion, no case is made out for interference. Appeal accordingly, dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)