| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 2154 1991 SLD 2154 (1991) 192 ITR 166 |
Allahabad High Court
B.P., JEEVAN REDDY, CJ AND R.R.K. TRIVEDI, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
B.P., JEEVAN REDDY, CJ AND R.R.K. TRIVEDI, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Khushal Chand Narain Das ( HUF)
v.
Deputy Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 269UC, read with sections 269UD and 269UG, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Purchase of immovable property by Central Government in certain cases - Whether appropriate authority was justified in passing an order 'filing' intimation given by petitioner under section 269UC on grounds that property in question stood attached for non-payment of tax demand, etc., and also that it would not be sold being under attachment - Held, no FACTS The petitioner entered into an agreement for the sale of a property at Kanpur with one M for Rs. 24 lakhs. The petitioner gave necessary intimation/statement to the appropriate authority as required under section 269UC. The appropriate authority passed an order' filing' the intimation given on the ground that there was contradiction between the recitals in the agreement for sale and in the affidavit sworn by the transferor with regard to the attachment of the property for Government dues and taxes outstanding. He pointed out that even as per agreement for sale the property was under attachment and, if so, it could not be sold by virtue of the prohibition contained in section 64 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The appropriate authority also observed that no permission had been obtained from the appropriate court for selling the said property. After the receipt of the said order the petitioner filed two more applications for rectification of the aforesaid order and issue of a no objection certificate contending that the property was attached for realisation of outstanding excess profit tax demand and that the said demand had been satisfied, but the same were also rejected. Thereupon the petitioner filed a writ. HELD As per sub-section (1 ) of section 269UG the amount of consideration payable in case an order of purchase is made by the Central Government shall be tendered to the persons entitled within one month of the property vesting in the Government. The proviso to sub-section further says that if any liability for any tax etc. is remaining payable by any person entitled to receive the consideration under section 269UF, the appropriate authority may pay over the said amount towards the discharge of the said liability,…
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