Law:

Section:

2008] 304 ITR 168 [2007] 165 TAXMAN 482 (BOM.) HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY Govardhandas Odhavji Dhakan* v. S.K. Laul F.I. REBELLO AND J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. WRIT PETITION NO. 570 OF 1993 SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 Section 269UD of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Purchase of immovable property by Central Government - Order by appropriate authority - Whether where difference in sale price between sale instances relied upon by revenue and flat in question which was purchased by revenue was only about 11 per cent, appropriate authority could not have purchased said property under Chapter XX-C - Held, yes FACTS By an agreement, the petitioner had agreed to purchase the flat in question situated in Vile Parle (West), Bombay. The appropriate authority, however, passed an order dated 27-10-1989 under section 269UD(1) for purchase of the said flat giving references of three sale instances. In instant petition, the petitioner submitted that the appropriate authority had not determined the fair market value of the said flat so as to satisfy the test of difference of 15 per cent criteria; the first sale instance though relatable to the flat in question, the difference in the price variation being less than 15 per cent, and the same could not be purchased based on the first sale instance and as regards the second and third sale instances, they pertained to the flats situated at Vile Parle (East) which were not at all comparable with the flat in question and, therefore, order could not be sustained based on second and third sale instances also. HELD In C.B. Gautam v. UOI [1993] 199 ITR 530/[1992] 65 Taxman 440 , the Apex Court categorically held that Chapter XX-C can be resorted to only where there is significant undervaluation of the property to the extent of 15 per cent or more in the agreement of sale, as evidenced by the apparent consideration being lower than the fair market value by 15 per cent or more. Admittedly, there was no finding recorded in the impugned order to the effect that there was undervaluation to the extent of 15 per cent or more of the fair market value. Thus, the impugned order passed in breach of the mandate given by the Apex Court in the case ofC.B. Gautam (supra) could…

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