K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX REFERENCE NO.40 OF 1999 WEALTH TAX REFERENCE NO.40 OF 1999 WEALTH TAX REFERENCE NO.40 OF 1999 In the matter of R.A.Nos.2976 & 2975/Bom/1990 (Arising out of W.T.A.Nos.226 & 515/Bom/1989) (Assessment Years : 1982-83 & 1983-84) Shri Vimal R.Ambani ) C/o. Natwarlal & Co., Court House,) Dhobi Talao, Bombay-400 002 )..Applicant V/s. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax ) Bombay City-VI, Bombay )..Respondents ---- Mr.J.D.Mistry i/by Raj Darak for the applicant. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 16.01.2009. P.C. 1. The two questions which have been referred for our opinion under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act are as under :- (1) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount paid under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act,1974, constitutes an asset under Section 2(e) of the W.T.Act, and therefore, includible in the net wealth of the assessee"? (2) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in Law in holding that for applying the provisions of Rule 1BB of the Wealth-rax Rules, 1957, the gross maintainable rent of 1/3rd share in the self-occupied property at Vimal House, Ahmedabad has to be the 1/3rd sum equivalent to the standard rent under the Bombay Rent Control Act and not 1/3rd the Municipal Annual Rateable Value?" 2. For the reasons recorded in the judgment and order separately delivered today in Wealth Tax Reference No.34 of 1999, question no.(1) is answered affirmatively and against the assessee whereas question no.(2) is answered affirmatively and in favour of the assessee. 3. Reference stands disposed off with no order as to costs. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)