9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0. They were interested in selling the said flat. They entered into an agreement on October 6, 1992 to sell the same to Respondents No.3 and 4. The flat was to be sold for Rs.19 lakhs. Thereafter as per the requirement of Chapter XX-C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, they filed the necessary Form 37-I for approval of the said transaction on October 15, 1992. 3. Petitioners No.3 and 4 received a notice dated December 15, 1992 from the Appropriate Authority. This notice stated that they should show cause as to why an order should not be made in their case under section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act. They were asked to attend before the Appropriate Authority on December 22, 1992. 4. The petitioners accordingly attended before the Appropri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re cited by the Petitioners, the second one, namely Flat No.C-3 on the 10th floor in the same building is situated just above the flat involved in the present petition. It is of the identical size and it has also been sold for Rs.19 lakhs. As far as that transaction is concerned, the Appropriate Authority consisting of the very three officers has granted a certificate under section 269UL(3) of the Income Tax Act accepting that there was no undervaluation. 7. Alternatively, she submitted that even if one takes the figures which are disclosed in the order, it is seen that this flat on the 10th floor was sold at the rate of Rs.3352 per sq.ft. The order itself records that the present flat was sold at the rate of Rs.3164 per sq.ft. Even if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied upon are from four different buildings though located in the same area. As against that, the Petitioners have drawn attention to two instances from the very building. Out of the two flats, one is on the fifth floor, but it is in "A" Wing. So we may not treat it as a comparable instance. The other flat in the "C" Wing on the 10th floor is identical to the one which is involved in the present transaction and, as stated above, even as per the calculations reflected in the order of the Appropriate Authority, there is no undervaluation to the tune of 15 per cent. involved in the present petition. 10. This being the position, we have no alternative but to quash and set aside the order which has been impugned in the present petition. Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
