| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 2048 1991 SLD 2048 (1991) 192 ITR 391 |
Madras High Court
GOVINDSAMY, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
GOVINDSAMY, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
A. Harikrishnan
v.
Registrar, High Court
Law:
Section:
Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Purchase of property by Central Government - Whether sections 269UC and 269UL are applicable to a Court auction sale - Held, no FACTS The petitioner filed a writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari regarding sale of the immovable property by auction as it contravened section 269UC and sub-section (2) of section 269UL. It was contended that the immovable property of the -debtor could not be sold or transferred in execution of a decree without the intervention of the Central Government's option to buy such property. HELD Insofar as section 269UL is concerned, it may be stated that such provision cannot be made applicable to the Court auction sale which does not require any registration at all. Insofar as section 269UC is concerned, it is clear that no transfer of any immovable property, the value of which exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs, shall be effected except after an agreement for transfer is entered into between the person who intends transferring the immovable property and the person to whom it is proposed to be transferred. Insofar as this particular provision is concerned, the petitioner, being a -debtor, could not be construed as a person who intended transferring the immovable property; nor was he a party to the agreement for transfer and further unless the sale was confirmed in favour of the highest bidder, no one could contemplate who would be the proposed transferee. It might also be considered that in Court auction sale, no one can contemplate that there would be an agreement of sale as contemplated under section 269UC. The -debtor can never be an agreement- holder by reason of the fact that his property is being compulsorily brought to sale by auction only at the instance of the decree-holder and that the -debtor, who is not a willing seller, is not a party to any agreement and that there is no agreement at all insofar as the - debtor is concerned. While so, the petitioner could not have any apprehension with reference to the non-compliance of the provisions contained in Chapter XX-C. On considering the provisions contained in section 269UC, it was hardly possible to follow the procedure prescribed in…
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