9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (9) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts leading to the filing of this appeal are these : One Smt Ashrafunnisa Begum and her two sons sold an open plot of land bearing Municipal No. 16-7-767 near Chaderghat Bridge, Hyderabad,to Mohammed Mahboob Ali, his wife and son, who are the appellants before us. The sale deed was registered on April 30, 1973. The total area covered by the sale deed is 594 sq. yards (496 sq. metres) and the consideration specified in the instrument of transfer is Rs. 25,000. The department caused enquiries to be made through one of its inspectors and he submitted a report estimating the value of the property at Rs. 60,000 as against the consideration specified in the sale deed. The competent authority then initiated proceedings having formed an opinio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants, strenuously contended that the entire proceedings are vitiated as notices were not served on all the transferors. It is his case that the competent authority has to comply with the mandatory requirements of subsection (2) of section 269D and that, as he has failed to cause notice served on all the transferors, the entire proceedings are illegal and void. Mr. Rama Rao, the learned counsel appearing for the revenue, contended that it is not necessary that notices should be served under sub-section (2) of section 269D on all the transferors in this case since a notice has been served on Ashrafunnisa Begum who should be deemed to be the representative of her two sons also. The validity or otherwise of the notice required to be serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... live in commensality, they do not form a joint family in the sense in which that expression is used in the Hindu law (see Chapter VI, Mulla's Principles of Mahomedan Law, seventeenth edition, pages 44 and 54). Even assuming that a notice served upon Ashrafunnisa Begum would be notice not only to her, but to her son, Sultan Naseeruddin, who was residing in Germany, as there was a power-of-attorney in her favour, it cannot be inferred that service of notice on her amounts to service of notice on Sultan Raheemuddin, her other son. Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act has been introduced for acquisition of immovable properties in certain cases of transfer to counteract evasion of tax. Section 269C deals with immovable properties in respect of w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved on the transferor, the transferee the person in occupation of the property, if the transferee is not in occupation thereof, and on every person whom the competent authority knows to be interested in the property." This provision is mandatory. Notice as specified in sub-section (1) has to be served on the transferor of the immovable property, the transferee, the person in occupation of the property, if the transferee is not in occupation thereof, and on every person whom the competent authority knows to be interested in the property. The object in causing the notice served on the transferor, the transferee, the person in occupation of the property and on every person who is known to be interested in the property is to see that those w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State of Rajasthan, AIR 1967 SC 1074 and C.A. No. 2361 of 1968 dated August 11, 1972 (State of Mysore v. Abdul Razak Sahib, AIR 1973 SC 2361). In another case arising under the Land Acquisition Act, State of Mysore v. Abdul Razak Sahib, AIR 1973 SC 2361, the Supreme Court had occasion to consider the question as to the validity of a notice issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and held that non-compliance with the requirements of section 4(1) would render the proceedings illegal. The right given to the transferee or transferee under section 269D(2) is a valuable right to file objections objecting to the proceedings initiated for acquisition of the property sold. It would be open to the transferor as well as the transferee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e legal representatives of the deceased-testator. The Supreme Court did not say that notice to one of the legal representatives would be notice to all the legal representatives. The Supreme Court found fault with the Income-tax Officer for coming to the conclusion that the daughters of the deceased-testator alone were his legal representatives. Therefore, that decision renders no assistance to the proposition sought to be canvassed, viz., that Ashrafunnisa Begum was acting on behalf of her two sons. The fact that she did not choose to file objections does not by itself establish that the other two transferors had no objections to file in response to the proceedings initiated by the competent authority. We are of the opinion that a valuable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
