3 was answered in the affirmative.
The assessee filed a return on April 22, 1958 declaring a net wealth of Rs.
Appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated February 28, 1968 of the Patna High Court in Tax Case No.
The Wealth Tax Officer disallowed the claim in this respect on the ground that there was numberprovision for deducting the brokerage companymission.
The assessee sought to bring his case under section 5 1 viii of the Act.
J. Kolah and I. N. Shroff, for the appellant.
S. Nariman, Addl.
The assessee had held zamindari estate which was acquired by the Government under the Bihar Land Reforms Act.
The Wealth Tax Officer rejected this claim of the assessee on the ground that the aforesaid clause did number companyer jewelry.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1 1967 65 I. T. R 460.
8 of 1966.
Questions 1 and 2 were accordingly answered in the negative while question No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHANNA, J. This appeal on certificate is directed against the judgment of Patna High Court whereby that companyrt answered the following three questions referred to it under section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 Act No.
36,87,419 from the Government of Bihar as companypensation in that companynection.
The matter relates to the assessment year 1957 58, the relevant valuation date for which was March 31, 1957.
The assessee was to receive a sum of Rs.
The assesse was former Maharajadhiraja of Darbhanga.
Solicitor General of India, T. A. Ramachandran, S. P. Nayar and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
296 of 1970.
