NASIM SIKANDAR, J.---In this further appeal under section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Lahore Bench), Lahore, dated 21-5-1997 is assailed. The following common question is stated to have arisen therefrom:---- "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified to cancel the order made under section 17-B of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963; which was inserted through Finance Act, 1992 in place of section 25(2) of the Act (omitted through Finance Act, 1963) transferring the powers from Commissioner of Wealth Tax to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner."
2. After hearing the learned counsel at some length we are of the view that the question as framed by the petitioner CIT Wealth Tax Lahore Zone-B Lahore already stands answered by this Court in I.T.A. No.540 of 2000 in re: Mrs Adeeba Ehsan v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. It was found that the parts of the submissions made before us in that case were accepted on the ratio of an earlier judgment of this Court in re: CIT v. National Security Insurance Co. Lahore 2001 PTD 814. In that reported judgment it was inter alia held that where the Assessing Officer was clothed with a fresh power to examine certain kinds of reserves that power could not be exercised to examine similar reserves in the assessm ent years earlier to the introduction of the amendment whereby the power was conferred for the first time.
3. In the present case admittedly section 17-B empowering an IAC was inserted by Finance Act, 1992 and was to take effect from 1st July, 1992. Therefore, the power vested in IAC through amended provisions was available for the assessment year 1992-93 onwards only. The I.A.C's. Action in touching the assessm ent order prior to the aforesaid assessment years when power that vested only in the Commissioner of Wealth Tax was certainly not in accordance with law.
4. For various reasons given in the aforesaid I.T.A. No.540 of 2000 and in the case re: CIT v. National Security Insurance Co. Ltd. (Supra), our answer to common question is in the affirmative. The Tribunal is accordingly held to have been justified in canceling the order made by the IAC under section 17-B of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963.
5. This judgment will also dispose of I.T.As. Nos.122 and 123 of 1997. .