Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2007 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (8) TMI 271 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTProvisions of section 269UA(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 challenged as violative of article 14 of the Constitution - what is the date that has to be considered for the purpose of discounting? Whether it was open to the appropriate authority to have retained a sum of ₹ 14,251 towards vendor's liability of transfer fees? Held that:- View taken by this court is no longer good law and for the purpose of considering the discounted price what has to be taken is the date of the agreement. In the instant case, what is sought to be deducted is the proportionate amount of transfer fee to be paid to the society. In so far as "apparent consideration" is concerned what can be deducted are only the amount as statutorily provided under the section in the Chapter and no other amounts. The amount of transfer fee not being statutory, therefore, could not have been deducted. The result would be that on the order being- passed the property vested in the Government free from all encumbrances. The question of the Government paying any transfer fees or for that matter stamp duty or registration fees would not arise. This would be yet another reason to hold that the Government could not have retained any amount towards the transfer fees. Once that be the case the petition in so far as the deduction will have to be allowed. Thus the petition is allowed to the extent that the retention of sum of ₹ 14,251 was without the authority of law. The respondents are, therefore, directed to refund the said amount in favour of the petitioner with simple interest at the rate of 8 per cent. per annum from the date of retention till payment. Appeal partly allowed.
|