9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt was delivered by S. P. BHARUCHA J.--- These are appeals against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat, delivered on writ petitions. The controversy before its relates to the correct interpretation of section 269UA(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 269UA falls within Chapter XX-C of the Act, which deals with the purchase by the Central Government of immovable properties in certain cases of transfer Section 269UA is the definition section for the purposes of the Chapter. Clause (b) thereof defines "apparent consideration". So far as is relevant, "apparent consideration" means : "(1) in relation to any immovable property in respect of which an agreement for transfer is made, being immovable pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the agreement. It is relevant, before we proceed, to point out that section 269UG provides that the amount of the consideration payable on purchase by the Central Government must be tendered to the person entitled thereto within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the immovable property vests in the Central Government. Section 269UH states that if the Central Government fails to tender such payment within such time, the order of purchase by the Central Government of the immovable property shall stand abrogated and the immovable property shall stand re-vested in the transferor. On a plain reading of section 269UA(b), there is no interlinking of the apparent consideration to be determined thereunder with the pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riate Authority [1995] 213 ITR 33. It was argued by learned counsel for the Revenue before that High Court that, for the purpose of discounting, the relevant date is the date of the agreement and not the date of the payment by the Central Government and, in support of his submission, he relied upon the expression "as on the date of such agreement for transfer" in section 269UA(b). The High Court did not agree because, in its view, the plain reading of the definition of apparent consideration made it clear that the value of the consideration payable after the date of the agreement was the discounted value and the definition did not prescribe that the discounted value should be ascertained with reference to the date of the agreement. In its v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
