TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on filing of a statement under section 269UC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the appropriate authority could decline both the pre-emptive purchase and the issuance of a no objection certificate, and whether the impugned order was liable to be quashed with a direction to issue the certificate.
Analysis: The statutory scheme under Chapter XX-C permits only two courses upon receipt of a statement under section 269UC: the appropriate authority may either exercise the right of pre-emptive purchase within the prescribed period or, if it does not so decide, issue a no objection certificate enabling the parties to complete the transfer. The authority cannot adopt a third course or keep the matter in suspense after the statutory period expires. Once the two-month period from the end of the month in which the statement is filed lapses, the right to purchase stands lost.
Conclusion: The impugned order was unsustainable and was quashed, and the appropriate authority was directed to issue the no objection certificate under section 269UL(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the petitioners obtained relief against the impugned refusal, with a consequential direction to the appropriate authority to proceed in accordance with the statutory scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: Under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the appropriate authority has only two permissible options on receipt of a valid statement: purchase the property within the statutory period or issue a no objection certificate; it cannot refuse both or act beyond the prescribed time limit.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
