MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX REFERENCE NO.4 OF 1998 Commissioner of Wealth Tax..Applicant Vs. K.M. Premchand .......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:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the valuation of ’Madhu Kunj’ property should be done under Rule 1BB of W.T. Rules for determining the value of the assessee’s interest in the property, even though the said property was the business asset of the firm." . 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 the 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.)