Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1995 (7) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as " the Act "). It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 3 owned a plot of land admeasuring 675 sq. yds situate at Maninagar, Ahmedabad, on which seven shops were constructed. All the shops were let out to different tenants and they were in possession since many years. The petitioner was also one of the tenants. Since respondent No. 3 was willing to sell the property and the petitioner was one of the sitting tenants, the petitioner was interested in buying the property. An agreement to sell was, therefore, entered into between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 on July 21, 1994, for an amount of Rs. 13.13 lakhs. The agreement is annexed to the petition. As the total sale consideration exceeded Rs. 10 lakhs, it was necessary .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 9UD(1) of the Act and the notice was liable to be revoked. After considering the reply, the appropriate authority passed the impugned order. In paras 4 and 5, it was stated as under : 4. We have carefully considered the argument advanced by Shri B. K. Jani, advocate, and the submissions made by the transferor and the transferee and the same are not accepted on the following grounds : The property under consideration can be developed even without disturbing the tenants because the property under consideration is a corner plot and can have separate entrance on 30' wide road. Though the property is in the residential zone, it has commercial potential. There are seven shops on the front on 50' wide road and is situated opposite to L. G. H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of property under consideration would be Rs. 2,236 and of SIP 1 Rs. 2,788 and SIP 2 Rs. 3,772. In the affidavit-in-reply, filed on behalf of the respondent, the deponent took into account the fact regarding sitting tenants in the property under consideration but has stated as under : (3)(c) With reference to paras 2.1 and 3.2 (a) it is submitted that the grounds raised therein are not tenable. The property is a corner plot abutting on a 50' road and 30' wide road and hence can be developed even without disturbing the tenanted shops abutting the 50' wide road. The net discounted rate of property under consideration after deducting the area occupied by the tenants and after considering the capitalised value of the tenanted portion the ra .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n with regard to SIP 2, the contention of the petitioner is well founded. As stated by us hereinabove, in reply to the show-cause notice itself, it was mentioned by the petitioner as well as respondent No. 3 that the property under consideration could not be compared with SIP 2 inasmuch as the property under consideration was in a residential zone whereas SIP 2 was in a commercial zone. In the impugned order, it was stated that the property under consideration was having commercial potential. It did not state specifically anything about SIP 2. However, in the affidavit-in-reply, it was stated : " 3. (e) With reference to ground (c), the averments made therein are not accepted. It is submitted that SIP 1 is abutting 40' wide road on L. G. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d material to arrive at the conclusion and satisfaction. Rejection of sale instances and/or grounds and/or reasons put forward by the party is one thing. At the most, it can be said to be a negative finding for not accepting the case of the transferor/transferee. The law, however, requires something more. In our opinion, it is incumbent upon the appropriate authority to come to a positive and definite conclusion that the property was undervalued. A similar question arose before us in Special Civil Application No. 869 of 1985, (Anagram Finance Ltd. v. Appropriate Authority [1996] 217 ITR 22 (Guj)) decided by us on March 30, 1995. Considering the relevant provisions of the Act as also the decision of the Supreme Court in Barium Chemicals Ltd. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates