1986 (5) TMI 29 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of notice under section 269D of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Compliance with the statutory requirements for initiating proceedings for acquisition of immovable property.
3. Requirement of publication in the Official Gazette for initiating acquisition proceedings.
4. Interpretation of section 269D regarding the manner of initiating acquisition proceedings.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought the quashing of a notice dated August 10, 1973, under section 269D of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The notice was related to the acquisition of a property in New Delhi. The petitioner argued that the notice did not comply with the provisions of section 269D, as amended by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 1972. The notice was received by the petitioner on September 4, 1973, and a writ petition was filed the same day challenging its validity.

2. The statutory requirement under section 269D mandates the initiation of acquisition proceedings by notice published in the Official Gazette. The notice in question was not published in the Official Gazette before being communicated to the petitioner or other concerned parties. The respondents did not dispute this fact, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with the statutory procedure for initiating such proceedings.

3. The court emphasized the importance of strict adherence to statutory procedures, citing the principle that when a statute prescribes a specific manner for an action to be taken, it must be followed precisely. The judgment referred to a previous ruling stating that "where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all." Therefore, the notice lacking publication in the Official Gazette was deemed non-compliant with the requirements of section 269D.

4. A comparison was drawn to a previous case where the initiation of acquisition proceedings was upheld due to proper publication in the Gazette. However, in the present case, the notice failed to meet the statutory requirements, leading to the conclusion that no valid proceedings could be initiated based on the defective notice. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned notice and ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the necessity of strict compliance with statutory provisions in matters of property acquisition under the Income-tax Act, 1961.