( 1 ) FACTS : Points for determination : Submission of the respective counsel :

( 2 ) A small but interesting question has been raised before us by Mr. Khaitan and Mr. Chowdhury appearing in support of the application and opposing the application, respectively. This question has two limbs, which we are called upon to answer.

( 3 ) THE first limb is with regard to Rule 1d of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957. Under the said rule, the unquoted shares are valued in the manner provided therein which in the case of Bharat Hari Singhania v. CWT, was held to be mandatory and is to be followed in every case where unquoted equity shares of a company are to be valued. Rule 1d provides for an exception in a phrase " (other than investment company or a managing agency company)". The said exception appears to be quoted in the decision in Bharat Hari Singhania as is quoted in the order dated September 4, 2001, passed in AWT No. 3730 of 1993 (Lalit Mohan Thapar v. CWT, ), of which rectification has been asked for. In the operative part of the said order dated September 4, 2001, the exception phrase has not been mentioned or indicated.

( 4 ) THIS, according to Mr. Khaitan, creates the c