Judgment :- N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, J. At the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Madurai, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench "D", has stated a case and referred the following question of law for the assessment year 1979-80 under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for our consideration. "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the capital of the Baby Sitalakshmi Trust should not be included in the net wealth of the assessee minor ?" The assessee is an individual and she is the beneficiary of a trust known as "Baby Sitalakshmi Trust". As per the terms of the trust, the income was to be accumulated year after year and should be handed over to the beneficiary only on her attaining the age of 18. She became a major only in June, 1983. It is contended on behalf of the assessee that the annual accretion to the trust cannot be treated as the income of the assessee, and the amount standing to the credit of the trust, cannot be treated as part of the net wealth of the assessee. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, held that only the enjoyment was postponed, but there was a vested interest in favour of the assessee. Therefore, he included the capital of Baby Sitalakshmi Trust in the net wealth of the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals), who held that part of the trust cannot be included as net wealth of the assessee for the reason that the assessee was entitled only to contingent interest. The appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal has also failed on the same reasoning. The Revenue challenged the finding of the Appellate Tribunal and sought for a reference and the Appellate Tribunal has referred the question of law set out aboveMr. R. Meenakshisundaram, learned counsel has undertaken to file a vakalat on behalf of the respondent. Mr. C. V. Rajan, learned counsel for the Revenue, has fairly brought to our notice that this court, in the case of the same trust in CIT v. Sitalakshmi (Minor) 1996 (217) ITR 595, 1996 (2) TLR 40 held that till the assessee attained the age of 18 years, the trust income would not be taxed in her hands. Mr. C. V. Rajan, learned counsel for the Revenue, has fairly brought to our notice that this court, in the case of the same trust in CIT v. Sitalakshmi (Minor) 1996 (217) ITR 595, 1996 (2) TLR 40 held that till the assessee attained the age of 18 years, the trust income would not be taxed in her hands. We are of the opinion that the decision of this court cited supra would equally apply to this case under the Wealth-tax Act, as the interest of the assessee in the trust is only a contingent interest. Following the said decision of this court cited supra we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. However, there will be no order as to costs.