Judgment N.K.Sud, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short "the Tribunal"), has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dt. 11th March, 1983, for the opinion of this Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the provisions of Section 7(4) of the WT Act, 1957, are applicable for the purpose of valuation of the assessees residential house in respect of the asst. yrs. 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76 although the relevant provision came into force from 1st April, 1976 and not with retrospective effect?" 2. In the return filed for asst. yrs. 1973-74 to 1975-76, the assessee had declared the value of her residential house situated at 696, Model Town, Jalandhar, at Rs. 1,19,110. While framing the assessment, the WTO fixed the market value at Rs. 3 lakhs in all the aforementioned three years. 3. Aggrieved by the said action, the assessee filed appeals before the AAC, wealth-tax who reduced the value to Rs. 2,50,000. 4. The assessee preferred further appeals to the Tribunal and contended that as per the provisions of Section 7(4) of the WT Act, 1957 (for short "the Act"), the value of the house had to be restricted to the figure determined for the asst. yr. 1971- 72. This plea was opposed by the Revenue on the ground that since the said provision had come into force w.e.f. 1st April, 1976, its benefit was available only for asst. yr. 1976-77 and subsequent years and not in the earlier assessment years. The Tribunal, however, accepted the plea of the assessee and held that since sub-s. (4) of Section 7 of the Act was merely procedural in nature, it was applicable to all pending proceedings. 5. It is a well settled position that a rule providing a method of valuation of an asset is procedural in nature and thus, is applicable to all pending assessments irrespective of the date on which it is incorporated. Reference in this behalf may be made to the law laid down by the apex Court in CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swamp & Sons (1994) 210 ITR 886 (SC). Reference in this behalf may be made to the law laid down by the apex Court in CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swamp & Sons (1994) 210 ITR 886 (SC). While dealing with Rule 1BB of the WT Rules, 1957, which was incorporated w.e.f. 1st April, 1979 prescribing the method of valuation of the house wholly or mainly used for residential purposes, it was held that the same was applicable to all pending assessments. The apex Court observed that procedural law, generally speaking, is applicable to all pending cases and no suitor can be said to have a vested right in procedure. The judgments of various High Courts in CWT v. Lachhmandas Bhatia (1987) 163 ITR 586 (MP), CWT v. Niranjan Narottam (1988) 173 ITR 693 (Guj), CWT v. O.P. Tandon (1992) 195 ITR 688 (Del), CWT v. Vidyavathi Kapur (1984) 150 ITR 319 (Kar), Dilip Kumar Mitra v. CWT (1993) 200 ITR 336 (Cal) and Smt. Manjushree Biswas v. CWT (1988) 171 ITR 348 (Cal), were affirmed. 6. In view of the settled position, the question is answered in the negative, i.e., against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.