IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.927 OF 2000 WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.927 OF 2000 WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.927 OF 2000 The Commissioner of Wealth Tax Mumbai City I, Mumbai .. Appellant V/s Mrs.Mala Sinha .. Respondent Dr.P.Daniel for the Appellant. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 28.06.2005. DATE : 28.06.2005. DATE : 28.06.2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appelant. The question raised in the above Appeal reads as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the order of CIT (A) and holding that the value of unexpired annuities is to be computed by adopting a discounting factor of 25% by relying upon its decision in the case of Vinod Khanna in ITA No.749/B/89 dated 26.2.90? " 2. The Tribunal appears to have relied upon its own earlier decision in the case of Vinod Khanna - ITA Vinod Khanna - ITA Vinod Khanna - ITA 749/Bom/89, dated 26.2.1990 749/Bom/89, dated 26.2.1990 749/Bom/89, dated 26.2.1990 copy whereof is annexed to the present Appeal at Exhibit ‘D’. The learned Counsel for the Appellant is however unable to state as to whether the Department has challenged the aforesaid order passed in the case of Vinod Khanna Vinod Khanna Vinod Khanna. Even otherwise, the reasoning adopted in Vinod Khanna’s Vinod Khanna’s Vinod Khanna’s case appears to be fair and reasonable, and we do not find any substantial question of law involved. Under these Under these Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere. Appeal therefore stands dismissed. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (J.H.BHATIA J.) (J.H.BHATIA J.) (J.H.BHATIA J.)