1996 (11) TMI 58 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
Jurisdiction under section 269H of the Income-tax Act, 1961; Interpretation of section 269D regarding initiation of acquisition proceedings and limitation period.

Jurisdiction under section 269H of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
The appellant challenged the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under section 269H of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant sought to set aside the order dated May 22, 1985, passed by the Tribunal.

Interpretation of section 269D regarding initiation of acquisition proceedings and limitation period:
The case involved the acquisition of land by the respondent, which was challenged on the grounds of limitation. The initiation of proceedings for acquisition was deemed to have occurred on the publication of the notice in the Official Gazette. The Tribunal held that the proceedings were time-barred based on the date of publication in the Gazette. However, the High Court disagreed with this interpretation.

The High Court analyzed the language of section 269D of the Act of 1961, emphasizing that the crucial point for determining the period of nine months is the date of initiation of the proceedings. It was noted that the statute does not require the date of initiation to be the date on which the Official Gazette is made available for sale to the public. The Court referenced prior decisions, including a Full Bench ruling, to support its interpretation.

Citing the Full Bench decision in Amrit Sports Industries' case, the Court highlighted that the primary provision for initiation of acquisition proceedings is the publication in the Official Gazette. The Court reiterated that any procedural defect in compliance with sub-section (2) of section 269D would not affect the jurisdiction of the competent authority. The Court concluded that the Tribunal erred in declaring the proceedings as time-barred.

In light of the above analysis, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, and remanded the case for a decision on the merits.