Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 269,269UA(b)

(a) Income-tax----Income-tax Department---Decision of High Court in the case of one assessee against Department---No appeal to Supreme Court filed--­Subsequent decision of High Court in the cases of other assessees following earlier decision---Department not entitled to accept in earlier case and challenge its correctness without just cause in the cases of other assessees. (b) Income-tax--- ----Purchase of immovable property by Central Government---Obligation to pay "apparent consideration"---Discounted value of apparent consideration--­Whether registration fees and stamp duty can be taken into account because seller had agreed to share those expenses---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.269UA(b), 269UD & 269UF. In Pradip Ramanlal Sheth v. Union of India (1993) 204 ITR 866, the Gujarat High Court had decided, inter alia, that the appropriate authority had no power, authority or jurisdiction, in ascertaining the discounted value of the apparent consideration, under section 269UD of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to deduct from the total amount of the consideration, any sum on the supposition that if the sale had taken place the seller would have been out of pocket to the extent of 50 per cent. of the total registration fees and stamp duty, because he had agreed that these expenses would be shared equally between the seller anal buyer. In a subsequent case relating to other parties the Gujarat High Court followed its earlier decision. The Department preferred an appeal to the supreme Court from the later decision of the High Court. The Department was unable to explain what was the fate of the appeal filed against the decision in Pradip Ramanlal Sheth v. Union of India, if filed, or why no appeal was filed against that…

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