The income-tax liability under Sec. 68 of the Finance Act, 1965, could be deducted in determining net wealth under Sec. 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act.

( 1 ) SINCE common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases, they are disposed of by this common order.

( 2 ) THESE seven references are made by the Income-tax Appellate tribunal, Bangalore Bench, under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The relevant assessment years are 1959-60 to 1965-66.

( 3 ) ON 26-4-65, the assessee made a voluntary disclosure before the commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Bangalore, declaring a total amount of Rs. 11,67,008 distributed over several previous years as his income which had not been disclosed in Ms returns before 1-3-65 and which had escaped assessment before that date. The said diclosure was made under sec. 68 of the Finance Act of 1965. On the basis of the said disclosure the assessee paid on 10-5-65, an amount of Rs. 7,00,205 being 60 per cent of the disclosed amount. Thereafter, the Wealth-tax Officer issued notices under sec. 17 of the Wealth-tax Aot, in respect of the assessment years 1958-59 to 1964-65 on the basis of the. information furnished by the assessee in the statement accompanying the disclosure made by him on 26-4-65. During the assessment years 1958/59 to 1964-65, the assesses had not filed any return of wealth in repect of any part of the amount disclosed by him nor had he been assessed to wealth tax prior to the date of notice.

( 4 ) IN the course of the enquiry held by the Wealth-tax Officer, subsequent to the issue of the said notices, the assessee furnished information to the Wealth-tax Officer in respect of his assets qtc, in respect of the relevant years. On the basis of the information furnished by the assessee the Wealth-tax Officer pasjsed orders of assessment under Sec. 16 (3) read with Sec. 17 of the Wealth-tax Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Wealth tax Officer, the assessee preferred appeals before the concerned Appellate aast Commr of Wealth-tax who allowed the appeals in part. On further appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in all the cases, the orders passed by the Appellate Asst Commr of Wealth-tax were affrmed. The tribunal found that the Wealth-tax Officer had reason to believe that the wealth of the asaessee had escaped assessment during the years 1958-59 to 1964-65 and that the income-tax liability in respect of the income disclosed in the disclosure application on 26-4-65 could not be deducted in computing the net wealth on the relevant valuation dates.

( 5 ) AT the instance of the assessee, in respect of the assessment year- 1959-60 to 1964-65, the following two questions have been referred for the opinion of this Court : (1 ). Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Wealth-tax Officer had reason to believe that 'the wealth of the assessee had escaped assessment for the years under consideration? (2 ). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income-tax liability in respect of the income disclosed in the disclosure application of 26-4-65 could not be deducted in arriving at the net wealth of the appellant on the relevant valuation date?

( 6 ) THE reference made in respect of these years are registered as trc. 5 of 1974 to TRC. 10 of 1974 on the file of this Court. TRC. 11 of 1974 relates to the assessment year 1965-66 and the only question referred to by the Tribunal in that case for the opinion of this Court at the instance of the assessee is similar to the Second question referred to above.

( 7 ) IN so far as the first question in TRCs. 5 to 10 of 1974 is concerned, it has to be observed that the declaration made by the assessee under sec. 68 of the Finance Act 1965 and the annexure thereto themselves contain the material on which reasonable belief could be entertained by the wealth-tax Officer that some wealth which was assessable to tax had been withheld from the knowledge of the Department during the relevant years. After looking into the records, the Tribunal has found that in i