N.D. Ojha, C.J.

1. An application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), was filed in this court by the assessee along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act inasmuch as the application under Section 27(3) of the Act had been filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed for such an application. The matter was listed before a Division Bench of this court which was of the opinion that there are conflicting views of this court with regard to the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act and consequently the matter deserved to be decided by a larger Bench. The two Division Bench decisions of this court which, according to the learned judges, contained conflicting views were CIT v. Gupta & Sons Pvt. Ltd. [1984]146ITR506(MP) and CIT v. Trilokinath [1984]147ITR613(MP) . The learned judges, therefore, referred the following question to a larger Bench :

" Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to an application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act when there is no express provision contained in the Wealth-tax Act excluding the operation of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to this application ? "

It is thus that this question has come up for consideration before us. The question, which came up for consideration in the case of Gupta & Sons P. Ltd. [1984]146ITR506(MP) was:

" When there is no specific provision under the Income Tax Act, 1961, enabling the Income Tax Officer to condone the delay in making an application under Section 146, whether the Tribunal was right in law in applying the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act ? "

It was argued before a Division Bench of this court in that case that in view of the provisions of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, the provisions of Section 5 of the said Act were applicable. This submission, however, did not find favour with the learned judges and they held that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act were not attracted to the case of an application filed under Section 146 of the Income Tax Act.

2. In the case of Trilokinath [1984]147ITR613(MP) , on the other hand, the question which came up for consideration before another Division Bench of this court was as to whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applied to an appeal under Section 269H of the Income Tax Act and it was held, relying on Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, that since the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act had not been expressly excluded by Section 269H of the Income Tax Act, the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act were applicable.

3. In the instant case, we are not concerned with an application or appeal under the Income Tax Act. On the other hand, we are concerned with an application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act. We shall therefore, confine our discussion to the question referred to us, i.e., whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to an application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the cases on which reliance was placed by them, we are of the opinion that there is intrinsic evidence in the legislative history of Section 27 of the Act itself to indicate that Section 5 of the Limitation Act would apply to an application under Section 27(3) of the Act. In this connection, we may point out that Section 27 of the Act, as it stood prior to its amendment by the Amendment Act No. 46 of 1964, which came into effect from April 1, 1965, had nine Sub-sections. By the said Amendment Act No. 46 of 1964, Sub-section (8) and (9) were deleted. Sub-section (9) so deleted read as hereunder :

" Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to an application to the High Court under this section."

The term "application to the High Court under this section" contained in Sub-section (9) aforesaid obviously referred to the application contemplated by Section 27(3) of the Act. The reasons for deletion of Su