| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1922 1993 SLD 1922 (1993) 200 ITR 773 |
Madras High Court
VENKATASWAMI AND ABDUL HADI, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
VENKATASWAMI AND ABDUL HADI, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Appropriate Authority, Government of India
v.
Naresh M. Mehta
Law:
Section:
Section 269UD, read with section 269UL of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Purchase of immovable property by Central Government - Whether section 269UD gives jurisdiction to appropriate authority to adjudicate upon legality of transaction which is proposed to be entered into by applicant - Held, no Section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Supreme Court - Appeal to - Whether where Supreme Court gives its opinion that conclusion reached by High Court is correct and dismisses special leave petition, it can be said that Supreme Court has affirmed decision of High Court - Held, yes FACTS One N initially purchased by sale deed dated 19-1-1990 a portion of a house property for Rs. 9.5 lakhs. Subsequently on 15-2-1990 he entered into a sale agreement for purchasing the balance portion of the property from the same owner for a sum of Rs. 32.50 lakhs. Since the sale consideration was above Rs. 10 lakhs, N, as required under section 269UC, read with rule 48L, reduced the sale agreement in the form of a statement prescribed under Form No. 37-I and submitted it to the appropriate authority on 9-3-1990. The appropriate authority by his order dated 17-5-1990 informed N that the statement in Form No. 37-I was not a valid statement under section 269UC(3), as the alleged partition of the property into two parts appeared to be nothing but an attempt to transfer the property by resorting to unauthorised sub-division and rejected the statement holding that he could neither issue a no-objection certificate under section 269UL, nor issue an order for purchase under section 269UD. Thereafter the appropriate authority wrote to N on 12-7-1990, asking him to file another statement in Form No. 37-I. Then, N and his vendor once again filed another statement in Form No. 37-I on 25-7-1990. The appropriate authority by order dated 19-9-1990 once again rejected the statement. On writ, the single Judge held that if an application is made under section 269UC and if no order is passed within the prescribed time under section 269UD(1), it automatically follows that a certificate under section 269UL(3) must be issued. Accordingly, he quashed the order of the assessing authority dated 19-9-1990 and…
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