1. ' B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, C.J.---For the reasons stated in our order in Wealth-tax Applications Nos. 205 to 210 of 1989 (CWT v. Suresh Kumar Kaushik alias Chakkarpani (1991) 187 ITR 343), disposed of today, question No,1 alone in these cases is directed to be referred.. Question No,1 reads as follows: "Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was factually and legally correct in directing the discounted value of compensation received by the assessee, being taken in relation to the assessm ent years 1976-77 and 1977-78 when the asset to be valued was agricultural land ?"
2. ' So far as questions Nos.2 and 3 arc concerned, they cannot be referred for the reasons recorded in the aforesaid order.
3. ' These wealth-tax applications are allowed in part. No costs.