K.S. Paripoornan, J.
1. This is a petition filed by the Revenue, under Section 26(3) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the three questions of law, formulated in para 7 of the original petition for the decision of this court. The respondent is an assessee under the Gift-tax Act.
2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this original petition are this : The Gift-tax Officer initiated proceedings against the assessee in respect of the gift made by him of a rubber estate measuring 30.71 acres in Kanjirappally. The transfer was effected by a document dated March 30, 1978, relevant to the assessment year 1977-78. The consideration shown was Rs. 35,000. The Gift-tax Officer held that the value shown is very meagre and determined the value of the rubber estate at Rs. 1,84,260. It was affirmed in appeal. In second appeal before the Tribunal, it was contended that about 3,000 rubber trees in the estate were sold in April, 1978, and so in determining the value of the estate, only the land value should be taken. The Appellate Tribunal fixed the value of the trees at Rs. 60,000 and deducted the said sum of Rs. 60,000 from the entire value of the estate fixed by the Gift-tax Officer at Rs. 1,84,260. The value of the land was fixed at Rs. 1,500 per acre and the value of the entire estate was fixed at Rs. 1,05,000 and after deducting a sum of Rs. 35,000 reflected in the document, the value of gift was fixed at Rs. 70,000. On a perusal of the order of the Appellate Tribunal dated November 6, 1985, it does not disclose the basis for fixing the value of the land at Rs. 1,500 per acre. Moreover, there is no definite material to show as to when the 3,000 rubber trees were cut and removed from the estate. It is not evident from the appellate order of the Tribunal as to why the valuation fixed by the Gift-tax Officer is stated to be arbitrary or the value of the rubber estate fixed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), even for the year 1980-81, at Rs. 6,750 per acre is not acceptable. The Appellate Tribunal has not indicated any definite reason for any one of these factors.
3. We are of the view that from the appellate order passed by the Tribunal dated November 6, 1985, the following question of law does arise for consideration :
'Is not the valuation of land by the Tribunal at Rs. 1,500 per acre most unreasonable, arbitrary, unsupported by any material and based on surmises and conjectures ?'
4. We are of the view that the said question of law does arise out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal and direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, to refer the said question of law, for the decision of this court, along with a statement of the case, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.The original petition is allowed.