Pre-emptive purchase under Chapter XX-C cannot be stalled indefinitely when statutory set-off protects outstanding tax claims.

Under Chapter XX-C, the authority could not indefinitely withhold a decision on a pre-emptive purchase application merely because the property was under attachment and possible tax dues remained unresolved. The statutory proviso to section 269UG permitted any surviving tax liability to be adjusted against the consideration payable if the property was purchased, so apprehended arrears did not justify inaction. The authority was therefore required to decide within the stipulated time whether to purchase the property; if it declined to purchase, it had to issue a no-objection certificate. The Department's right to protect any outstanding claim through statutory set-off was preserved.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appropriate authority was justified in declining to act on the petitioner's application on the ground that the property was under attachment and whether, in the facts, the petitioner was entitled to a decision on purchase under Chapter XX-C or to a no-objection certificate.

Analysis: The property had been agreed to be sold and intimation had been given under the statutory pre-emptive purchase scheme. The authority declined to proceed mainly because it was not satisfied that all tax arrears and liabilities connected with the attachment had been cleared. The proviso to section 269UG provides a safeguard enabling the Department to set off any remaining tax liability against the consideration payable if the property is purchased. The existence of that safeguard meant that the authority could not indefinitely refuse to decide the matter merely on the basis of apprehended outstanding dues, and it had to take a decision whether to purchase the property within the statutory framework.

Conclusion: The authority was directed to decide, within the stipulated time, whether it would purchase the property under Chapter XX-C. If it did not propose to purchase the property within that period, it was to issue a no-objection certificate. If it chose to purchase, it could ascertain outstanding dues and make appropriate adjustment from the consideration.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent that the petitioner obtained a time-bound direction requiring the authority either to exercise the statutory purchase option or to issue a no-objection certificate, with the Department's right to protect any surviving tax claim preserved through statutory set-off.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Chapter XX-C, an authority cannot refuse to decide a pre-emptive purchase matter indefinitely on speculative doubts about outstanding tax liabilities where the statute itself provides a mechanism for adjustment of such liabilities against the consideration payable.

---