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

1984 (3) TMI 30

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urdev Nagar, Ludhiana, stands built on khasra Nos. 68/20-4 and 20-5 in khata 394/374 terf karabars. The site thereunder was purchased by one Santokh Singh Grewal in 1964, and the house was built thereon in 1965, totally costing Rs. 40,000. In December, 1972, the house was sold to the present appellants for an apparent consideration of Rs. 80,000. On April 16, 1973, the appellants mortgaged with possession one-half share thereof with one Sudesh Kumar Thapar for an apparent consideration of Rs. 45,000. The Competent Authority, appointed for the purpose under Chapter XX-A of the Act, issued a notice of acquisition on June 13, 1973, under s. 269D(1), which was served on the appellants on June 15, 1973. Thus commenced the proceedings. The hou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Valuation Officer, i.e., for Rs. 1,03,713, and thus recorded a finding that the fair market value of the property had exceeded the apparent consideration by more than 25 per cent. thereof. The appellants took the matter in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, but the order of the Competent Authority was confirmed with a slight modification inasmuch as the cost of the superstructure was reduced from Rs. 55,713 to Rs. 52,000. The cost of the land at Rs. 48,000 was maintained. The total value of the house in question thus worked out to Rs. 1,00,000. By such reduction, as the difference found was not more than 25 per cent., the Tribunal concluded that there would thus be no conclusive proof against the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... id four instances were not in respect of Gurdev Nagar. On the other hand, it was pointed out from paragraph 8 of the order of the Competent Authority that it was undisputed that the four instances of sales of plots of land, referred to by Shri Kang, were in Gurdev Nagar. A comparison had been drawn by the Competent Authority of the price situation in Gurdev Nagar and Sarabha Nagar. This seems to us plain that the Tribunal put the undisputed matter in doubt as a first step to demolish the report of Shri Kang and, in our view, not on any sound legal reasons. Secondly, the four instances of sales in Gurdev Nagar, which bear the following details, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h at the rate of Rs. 40 per square yard. The rejection of these instances on the ground of their pertaining to smaller plots, to our mind, was surmising, disadvantageous to the appellants and conjecturing in realm, far away from hard realities. So far as the fourth instance is concerned, the yardstick applied was that its position, whether it was advantageous or not as compared to the plot on which the building in question stood, could legitimately be applied to the three instances of Gurdev Nagar adopted by the Competent Authority and the Tribunal also, for there is no positive finding whether those plots compare favourably or otherwise as to the advantages of the plot in question. This is the subject-matter of the third comment. It would .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r than the sale in question. Their location too, as compared to the plot in question, is not known and none of them was even closely proximate to the date of the transfer. The only closest sale to the date of the transfer was as reflected in the second instance quoted by Shri Kang, which, as dealt earlier, was overlooked by the Tribunal and, in our view, illegally. On this analysis, the finding of the Tribunal that the three instances relied upon by it appear to be more favourable than the instances relied upon by the value of the appellants, is patently arrived at on irrelevant factors. If these three instances had to play their part, they could not do so in isolation to the disadvantage of the appellants, as the four instances, quoted by .....

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