TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich admittedly the petitioner has failed to make. Under the circumstances, as such the consequences on breach of the terms and conditions on which the sale came to be confirmed must follow. At the time of making bid the petitioner was required to make the provision for deposit of the bid amount. Now, so far as the request on behalf of the petitioner to grant extension to the petitioner to deposit the balance bid amount is concerned, the same cannot be accepted now. It is required to be noted that as such the petitioner was required to deposit / pay the entire bid amount within a period of 90 days from 14/27.02.2014 i.e. on or before 14/27.05.2014. Therefore, time to make the payment of entire bid amount had expired as far as back in the month of May, 2014. Granting of further time and/or extension of time further would tantamount to varying the terms and conditions on which the bids were invited and even the terms and conditions on which the sale came to be confirmed in favour of the petitioner.In any case this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot extend the period to make the payment of bid amount which would tantamount to varying t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the successful bidder on the property being knocked out in his favour in the auction. It was also provided in the said public notice / advertisement that subject to the terms thereof 25% of the amount will have to be paid within 30 days of the auction and the balance amount will have to be paid within 90 days from the date of confirmation of sale by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat. That the petitioner who claims to be the Manager of one Panchratna Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. also participated in the said public auction on depositing the caution deposit of ₹ 25,000/- and making earnest money deposit of ₹ 9,71,000/- as required before participating in the auction. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner through his authorized bidder i.e. Kantibhai K. Patel made the highest bid to the tune of ₹ 2,56,00,000/- in the said public auction. That as the said Kantibhai K. Patel was the only highest bidder, his highest bid of ₹ 2,56,00,000/- came to be accepted and the Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat vide letter dated 27.02.2014 confirmed the sale with respect to the above mentioned property. That as per the terms and conditions on which sal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that at that stage the petitioner assured that remaining amount of ₹ 88 lacs shall be paid within a period of 45 days. That vide communication dated 21.08.2014 the CCIT informed the petitioner company that their request through letter dated 28.05.2014 and 02.07.2014 for extension of time to pay the remaining bid amount cannot be accepted as the same is not in consonance with the terms and conditions under the CBDT Instruction No.1908 dated 19.07.1993. That the petitioner was also informed by the aforesaid communication that failure on the part of the petitioner to make the payment of the bid amount within the period specified will lead to forfeiture of the entire amount already paid. That thereafter vide impugned notice / communication dated 17.09.2014, the CCIT has informed the petitioner that the amount of ₹ 1,28,00,000/- already paid by the petitioner stands forfeited in view of the terms of para 11 of the AnnexureA of the terms and conditions of the CBDT Instruction No.1908 dated 19.07.1993 as well as paras 10 and 11 of the Auction Brochure of the subject property, as the petitioner failed to pay the entire bid amount wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmed that the petitioner has to make the payment of bid amount within a period of 90 days from the date of confirmation of the sale, failing which the amount already deposited shall be forfeited. It is required to be noted that as such on the aforesaid terms and conditions the sale came to be confirmed in favour of the petitioner. Despite the above, the petitioner has failed to make the payment of bid amount within 90 days from the date of confirmation of sale. It is required to be noted that the sale came to be confirmed in favour of the petitioner on the aforesaid terms and conditions vide communication dated 14.02.2014 which came to be communicated to the petitioner vide communication dated 27.02.2014. Thus, within a period of 90 days from 14/27.02.2014, the petitioner was required to make the payment of entire bid amount, which admittedly the petitioner has failed to make. Under the circumstances, as such the consequences on breach of the terms and conditions on which the sale came to be confirmed must follow. At the time of making bid the petitioner was required to make the provision for deposit of the bid amount. 4.1 Now, so far as the request on behalf of the petitioner t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
