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 (12) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the order itself it was directed by the appropriate authority to keep the aforesaid amount payable by the Central Government in the personal deposit account of appropriate authority until leasehold rights. The aforesaid order is under challenge in this petition on two grounds. Firstly, the order by the appropriate authority neither records a finding about the fair market value of the property sought to be purchased as on the date of agreement to sell without which no determination about undervaluation of consideration stated in the agreement could have been made, nor the order records a finding that the apparent consideration has been undervalued with a view to avoid tax. The satisfaction about the two facts are conditions precedent before .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the face of it must disclose about the satisfaction on the two aspects reached by the appropriate authority and reasons thereof. This court has also expressed the same opinion in the case of Sarwarben Temas Khambata v. Appropriate Authority [1995] 216 ITR 850 ; [1995] 2 GLH 636. The order under challenge nowhere records the satisfaction of the appropriate authority about understatement having been made with a view to evade the tax. The order, therefore, suffers from error apparent on the face of record and cannot be sustained. Assuming that the order under section 269UD(1) has been made in accordance with law under section 269UG it is required that the amount of consideration payable to the person entitled to such consideration within a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herein or deposit of money in contingencies stipulated in sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 269UG are mandatory in character. This is obvious from the consequence of failure to pay or tender the consideration in time or deposit the same in circumstances mentioned under section 269UG provided under section 269UH. The consequence of failure is abrogation of the order of purchase made under section 269UD and revesting of the property in the transferor on the expiry of the period stated under section 269UG without fulfilment of its requirement. From the impugned order in question and reply submitted on behalf of the respondents, we find none of the contingencies existed in which the amount can be deposited with the appropriate authority nor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he appropriate authority which appears to have weighed with it to direct the deposit of the amount instead of tendering it to the petitioner was to secure vacant possession of the property in question from one Mr. Modi or his assign who according to the petitioner was a tenant, but according to the appropriate authority was a person who has been put in occupation of the property for the purpose of defeating the provisions of Chapter XX-C, that is to say, for creating evidence for a lesser amount of fair market value of the property by showing it to be in the possession of a tenant and not in occupation of the owner. The recovery of possession of the property has not been made a ground under the statute itself for withholding payment. On t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ropriate authority the consequence which has been provided under section 269UH would necessarily follow, namely the order of purchase shall stand abrogated and the immovable property shall stand reverted to the transferor on the expiry of the period in which amount was to be tendered but has not been so tendered. For the reasons aforesaid this petition succeeds. The impugned order dated August 13, 1994, is quashed. As a consequence of which the property shall stand reverted to the owner of the property. As a consequence, the necessary no objection certificate about execution of the sale deed between the transferor and the transferee shall be issued by the appropriate authority within a period of four weeks from the date of producing this .....

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