| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 1028 1983 SLD 1028 (1983) 142 ITR 402 |
Bombay High Court
OCTOBER 12, 1981 MISC. PETITION No. 952 OF 1978.
PENDSE, J.
S.T. Tijoriwala for the Petitioner. P.M. Pradhan for the
Respondent.
OCTOBER 12, 1981 MISC. PETITION No. 952 OF 1978.
PENDSE, J.
S.T. Tijoriwala for the Petitioner. P.M. Pradhan for the
Respondent.
Amarchand J. Agarwal
v.
Union of India
Law:
Section:
Section 269C of the income-tax act, 1961-Acquisition of immovable property-Whether right to initiate proceedings under section 269C accrues to competent authority on date of registration of deed of conveyance under the registration act or on date of execution of deed between relevant parties-Held, on date of registration of deed Facts The owners of a certain property entered into an agreement on 7-11-1972 with a partnership firm, in which the petitioner was a partner, for the sale of the said property for Rs. 1,41,000. The document was registered under the Registration Act on 21-9-1977. Thereafter, the competent authority issued a notice under section 269C on 26-6-1978 to the petitioner and others who were in occupation of the property requiring them to show cause why proceedings should not be initiated for the acquisition of the said property on the ground that its fair market value exceeded the apparent consideration by more than 15 per cent. On writ, the petitioner, inter alia, argued (i) that section 269C was introduced with effect from 15-11-1972 and could not apply to transfers executed earlier; (ii) that though the document of sale was completed on its registration on 21-9-1977, the transfer would operate from the date of execution of the document, i.e., 7-11-1972, by virtue of the provisions of section 47 of the Registration Act; and (iii) that, therefore, the competent authority had no jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings. The revenue rebutted this argument by contending that the competent authority's right to initiate proceedings arose on the registration of the document which completed the transfer and that it was wholly irrelevant that the transfer operated from the date of its execution. Held Undoubtedly, section 47 of the Registration Act provides that the document shall operate from the time of its execution once it is registered by the registering authority, but it does not say when the sale would be deemed to be completed; it only permits a document to operate from a certain date which may be earlier than the date when it was registered. Further, it is not possible to hold that the transfer is complete on the date of execution and the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492