9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (5) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order quashing and setting aside orders, annexures " G " and " H " passed by the appropriate authority, respondent No. 1 herein, under section 269UE(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "), being illegal, ultra vires and contrary to law. It is the case of the petitioner that Kanaiyalal Ganapatram Upadhyay, respondent No. 2, entered into an agreement to sell his property to the petitioner bearing final plot No. 6 in Town Planning Scheme No. III of Usmanpura admeasuring 420 sq. yds. with old construction of 98.80 sq. mts. Banabhat was entered into on May 12, 1994, for consideration of Rs. 25,20,000. After the agreement to sell was made, the parties filled in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... age which was much interior to the main Ashram road. It was nearer to the old Vadaj where commercial development was comparatively less than the area covered between Paldi and Income-tax. Reliance was also placed on comparable sale instances. It was stated that the property of Budhalal Trust being S. P. No. 287, F. P. No. 287, T.P.S. 15 of Champaner Society, near Usmanpura Char Rasta, was sold at the rate of Rs. 2,471 per sq. mt. and that valuation was accepted by the authorities. The property situated at S. P. B/2, F. P. 23/B/Part belonging to Smt. Shardaben and others was sold as per the agreement dated June 16, 1994, at the rate of Rs. 6,041. It was submitted that the property quoted for comparison by the first respondent in the show-cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nderstated by more than 15 per cent. (2) The first sale instance relied upon by the transferor is not comparable because in that case the transferor is a charitable trust which was agreed to be sold after obtaining the permission from the Charity Commissioner and hence there is no chance for under-statement of the consideration. The second sale instance relied upon is also not comparable because in that property the plot was in the occupation of the tenant who was running his business in an entire plot. " It was then observed that the authority was satisfied that the property under consideration was fit for pre-emptive purchase under Chapter XXC of the Act. Therefore, in exercise of the powers vested under section 269UD(1) of the Act, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed near Usmanpura village which was much interior to the main Ashram road and nearer to old Vadaj where commercial development was comparatively lower than the area covered between Paldi and Income-tax. It was specifically averred that SIP was situated nearer to Income-tax Char Rasta which was a highly developed commercial area. Similarly, Madhuram Society bungalows were situated only at about 100 mts. from Income-tax Char Rasta whereas the PUC was situated at about 1,000 mts. away from Income-tax Char Rasta. The first respondent in the impugned order did not refute the above averments. On the contrary, looking to the order, one feels that impliedly the averments have been accepted inasmuch as it is stated in the order that considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale instance must be said to be a comparable one and should have been relied upon. By rejecting the said sale instance, the first respondent has committed an error of law apparent on the face of the record. Apart from the above grounds, in our opinion, Mr. Shah is right in submitting that the satisfaction as contemplated by section 269UD must be based on objective facts. There must be evidence and material to arrive at the conclusion and satisfaction. Rejection of sale instances and/or grounds and/or reasons put forth by the party is one thing. At the most, it can be said to be a negative finding for not accepting the case of the transferor/transferee. But the law requires something more. In our opinion, it is incumbent upon the appropri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... satisfaction has been arrived at by the first respondent on the basis of objective facts and no reasons have been recorded for coming to a positive conclusion as to why there was difference of more than 15 per cent., the order cannot be said to be in accordance with law and must be quashed and set aside. For the foregoing reasons, the petition requires to be allowed and is allowed. The impugned orders dated March 31, 1995, at annexures " G " and " H " are hereby quashed and set aside. Respondent No. 1 is directed to complete the necessary formalities within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this court including issuance of clearance certificate. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
