ORDER The High Court declined to call for a reference, at the behest of the Revenue, of the following question : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case including in particular the fact that part of the official residence of the ex-ruler of Ratlam who is the assessee-respondent, stood let out, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption of the value of the said property in its entirety under Section 5(1)(iii) of the WT Act, 1957?" It did so for the reason that, in its view, no question of law was raised. It appears, in fact, that the question was not referred because the answer was indicated by an earlier judgment of the High Court. 2. A question of law does clearly arise. In fact, it is the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue that the answer to it is furnished by the judgment of this Court in Mohammad Ali Khan & Ors. v. CWT1. We decline to decide the question here, particularly, since the respondent has not chosen to put in an appearance. 3. We allow the appeals, set aside the order under challenge and direct the Tribunal to refer to the High Court the question aforestated, after drawing up a statement of case. No order as to costs. Appeal allowed. **************** Parallel Citations of other Journals : Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Late Lokendra Singh Through Tehsildar, Ratlam, 2001(4) Supreme 354 : 2001 (166) CTR 508 : 2001 (162) Taxation 4 : AIR 2001 SC 1394 : 2001 (116) Taxman 605 : 2001 (249) ITR 671 00023