9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonable opportunity has been given to the vendor and vendee and there are several discrepancies in the proceeding before acquisition of the property in terms of section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The learned single judge has specifically emphasised on the decision in the case of C. B. Gautam v. Union a India [1993] 199 ITR 530 (SC). During the course of the argument before the learned single judge, learned counsel Dr. Pal on behalf of respondent No. 1 also prayed that the matter be remitted to the appropriate authority to give fresh opportunity to the vendor and vendee. This prayer of Dr. Pal was also rejected following the judgment of this court in the case of Dwarkanath. Chatterjee v. Union a India [1995] 213 ITR 470, taking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsideration as per agreement. Therefore, only five per cent. is now left to be paid. Under the agreement that will be paid at the time of completion of conveyance and on that amount, the interest is payable under the agreement itself, by the bank. None appeared for the authority or Government. The relevant facts in this regard are that the bank had agreed to purchase from Delite under two agreements, one dated April 21, 1994, and other dated May 27, 1994, 16 flats under construction at premises No. 250, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose Road, Tollygunge, Calcutta-700 047, for the purpose of providing residential accommodation to its officers who came on transfer for serving at its branches at Calcutta. As required by the provisions of Chapter X ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tition, the bank had duly paid in terms of the first agreement about 95 per cent. of the total consideration on receiving possession of the flats as aforesaid and only the balance about 5 per cent. remains to be paid since the same is payable only on execution of the conveyance which cannot be executed till today as "no objection certificate" has not been issued by the appropriate authority. In the case of the second agreement, Delite delivered possession of the flats to the appropriate authority before any order was passed in the writ petition and thereafter received it back from them under the orders of this court and again under an order of this court in this appeal, Delite handed over possession of the flats to the bank, after receivi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t than that for which it was agreed to be sold to respondent No. 1. Taking into account these circumstances we modify the impugned order and direct that in the event of the aforesaid order of the appropriate authority being upheld, the Government shall pay to the appellant, as the purchase price, the amount stated as the consideration for the sale of the said property in the agreement entered into between the appellant and respondent No. 1 with interest thereon at 15 per cent. per annum. In case the order of the appropriate authority is set aside and the transaction of sale in favour of respondent No. 1 is completed, respondent No. 1 shall pay to the appellant interest on the balance amount payable on account of the purchase price by resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8, the Supreme Court had directed the payment of interest at the rate of 15 per cent. per annum payable to the seller on delayed payment, in a case when delay was not on account of the seller. As stated above there were two agreements regarding the sale of flats by respondent No. 2-Delite Housing Corporation to the Vysya Bank, as per the agreement particular amount was payable at a particular stage of transfer, say as at the stage of execution of the agreement, then on or before the possession, then five per cent. at the time of completion of the conveyances. The details of the amounts which have been paid read as under : MAT No. 299 of 1998 : MAT No. 300 of 1998 : The Appropriate Authority of Income-tax, Calcutta and Others V. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent No. 7, had to incur some expenses on maintenance of the premises, those expenses are allowed to the vendor, respondent No. 7. It is also brought to our notice that the seller never objected to the acquisition under section 269UD, he simply filed the reply to a notice that it sold the flats to the bank for a consideration shown in the agreement to sale. In our view, this cannot be an obstruction in purchase by the appropriate authority Considering these facts and circumstances, as referred to above we are of the view that equity requires that respondent No. 7, vendor, is entitled for the interest at the rate of 12 per cent. from the Government, for the period from October 1, 1994 to July 22, 1998, on the amount Rs. 29,32,597 which co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
