9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs each. The agreements record that a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs had been paid by the petitioner to each of the owners as and by way of earnest money and in part payment of the agreed price. Chapter XX-A deals with the acquisition of immovable property in certain cases of transfer to counteract evasion of tax. On September 19, 1986, the petitioner submitted two statements in Form No. 37EE under section 269AB(2) of the Act to the competent authority under Chapter XX-A of the Act. The statements set out particulars of the transaction. Against the entry 7(i) : Whether the transfer of property involves trans action of the nature referred to in section 269AB(1)(b)--(i) the nature of the act having the effect of transferring or enabling the enjoyment of a property : in one it was mentioned "The agreement for sale dated September 1, 1986" and in the other "The agreement for sale dated September 15, 1986". On September 26, 1986, the statements in Form No. 37EE were registered with the competent authority. On October 1, 1986, Chapter XX-C of the Act came into force. Chapter XX-C deals with purchase by the Central Government of immovable property in certain cases of transfer. Under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... X-C of the Act). These are the orders which have been challenged in these proceedings. In each of the orders the appropriate authority has ordered the Central Government to buy the subject-matter of the two separate statements in Form 37-I at an amount of Rs.61 lakhs being the amount equal to the apparent consideration with regard to the separate owners. On December 22, 1986, this writ application was filed challenging the impugned orders. The directions were given for filing of affidavits but no affidavit-in-opposition was filed. In any event, the facts are not in dispute. The points raised are pure questions of law. The first submission is one which is not opposed by the respondents. That submission stems from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of C. B. Gautam v. Union of India [1993] 199 ITR 530. By that judgment, the Supreme Court had held that the provisions of natural justice were to be read into section 269UD of the Act. The impugned orders admittedly not having been passed after giving the parties concerned an opportunity of being heard cannot be sustained. However, the petitioner has raised a more fundamental contention. According to the petitioner, the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is said that both statements filed under Form No. 37EE were registered on September 26, 1986, prior to the coming into force of Chapter XX-C of the Act. The submission of the respondents briefly stated is that under Chapter XX-A of the Act transfer of immovable property within the meaning of section 269A(e)(i) of the Act connotates a situation when there is a registered conveyance, i.e., registered under the Registration Act, 1908. The transfer of immovable property under section 269A(e)(ii) read with section 269AB of the Act would connote a transfer to enjoy the property in praesenti. In this case, the instrument being neither registered under the Registration Act nor granting a right of enjoyment in praesenti, would not be a transfer under section 269RR of the Act. Section 269RR reads as follows: "269RR. Chapter not to apply where transfer of immovable propery made after a certain date.--The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to or in relation to the transfer of any immovable property made after the 30th day of September, 1986." As already noted, section 269RR is contained in Chapter XX-A and the reference to "this Chapter" refers to Chapter XXVIII (sic). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ), means transfer of such property by way of sale or exchange or lease for a term of not less than twelve years, and includes allowing the possession of such property to be taken or retained in part performance of a contract of the nature referred to in section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882) ; Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-clause, a lease which provides for the extension of the term thereof by a further term or terms shall be deemed to be a lease for a term of not less than twelve years if the aggregate of the term for which such lease has been granted and the further term or terms for which it can be so extended is not less than twelve years ; (ii) in relation to any immovable property of the nature referred to in sub-clause (ii) of clause (e), means the doing of anything (whether by way of transfer of shares in a co-operative society or company or by way of any agreement or arrangement or in any other manner whatsoever) which has the effect of transferring, or enabling the enjoyment of, such property." An instrument of transfer has been defined in section 269A(f) as meaning-- ". . . . the instrument of transfer registered under the Regis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y provision and the authority on the aspect, seen from the point of view of the intention of the Legislature, there can be no doubt that the transaction in question is covered by Chapter XX-A of the Act. Initially, when Chapter XX-A was introduced into the Act, it covered only transactions by way of sale or exchange. In 1982, the definitions of "immovable property", "transfer" and "instrument of transfer" noted above were amended. Section 269AB was introduced. The object of the amendment clearly was to widen the scope of the Chapter. Now, even the entering into the agreement of transfer and part performance would be included within the transactions covered by Chapter XX-A and amount to a transfer of immovable property within the meaning of that Chapter. An argument was made by the respondents that because the petitioner in Form No. 37-I had described the nature of the interest or right proposed to be transferred as ownership, this meant that no transfer of immovable property could be said to have already taken place as argued by the petitioner at the hearing. This is unacceptable. If the law is that a transfer of immovable property had already taken place under Chapter XX-A and w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
