Registration date controls section 269C acquisition powers; execution date is not the operative trigger for immovable property transfers.

For purposes of Chapter XX-A, the relevant date for exercising acquisition powers under section 269C is the date of registration of the transfer instrument, not the date of execution, because a transfer of immovable property is treated as effected only on registration. The Bombay High Court followed the Delhi and Andhra Pradesh High Courts and rejected the taxpayer's contention, affirming the Revenue's position on the statutory trigger date. On the constitutional issue, the Court treated the matter as raising a substantial question of law and granted a certificate under Article 132, noting that the same point was already pending before the Supreme Court.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the competent authority could exercise power under section 269C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 from the date of execution of the transfer document or only from the date of its registration; (ii) Whether a certificate under Article 132 of the Constitution of India should be granted.

Issue (i): Whether the competent authority could exercise power under section 269C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 from the date of execution of the transfer document or only from the date of its registration.

Analysis: The Court followed the view already taken by the Delhi High Court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court that, for the purposes of Chapter XX-A, a transfer of immovable property is effected only when the instrument of transfer is registered. On that basis, the effective date for action under section 269C is the date of registration, not the date of execution.

Conclusion: The contention of the petitioner was rejected and the decision under challenge was affirmed in favour of Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether a certificate under Article 132 of the Constitution of India should be granted.

Analysis: The Court held that the matter involved a substantial question of law concerning the validity and applicability of the impugned provision and noted that an appeal on the same point was already pending before the Supreme Court from the Delhi High Court decision.

Conclusion: The certificate was granted.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on merits, while a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court was issued on the constitutional question raised.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of section 269C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the relevant date for initiation or exercise of acquisition powers is the date on which the transfer instrument is registered, not the date of execution.

---