TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (9) TMI 59
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and (ii) that this had not been done with the object of: (a) facilitating the reduction or evasion of the transferor's liability to pay Income-tax in respect of any income arising out of the transfer; or (b) facilitating the concealment of income, money or assets which have not been or which ought to be disclosed by the transfer for Income tax purposes. This notice was published in the Official Gazette on 24th March, 1973 as prescribed in s. 269D(1). Copies of the said notice were also duly served on the transferor, transferees and persons in occupation of the property; the service on the appellants was effected on22nd March, 1973. Publication of the notice in the other modes contemplated by the statute were also effected as follows :- . . Mode of service Date (i) Affixation of a copy of notice on a conspicuous part of the property. 26-3-1973 (ii) Affixation of a copy of the notice on the notice board of the Office of the competent authority. 5-4-1973 (iii) Proclamation by beat of drum in the locality. 194-1973 3. On the basis of these dates, the appellants raised a contention on which the learned Members who haard the appeals expressed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the property so that they can put forward their objections, if any, to the proposal. To full safeguard the rights of all parties interested and also to safeguard the Revenue against claims by some persons that they have not had notice, the statute provides for more than one way of making known the proposal for acquisition: These modes are:- (i) publication of the notice in the Official Gazette; (ii) Service of the notice on (a) persons who clearly have an interest in the property; the transferor, transferor, transferee and the person in occupation and (b) on persons who, to the knowledge of the competent authority, are interested in the property; (iii) Publication of the notice on the notice board or other conspicuous place in the office; (iv) Publication of the notice by affixture of the notice on a conspicuous part of the property; (v) Publication of the substance of notice in the prescribed manner at convenient places in the locality. Every one of these modes of publication of intention to acquire is compulsory. I would agree with the learned Accountant Member that if publication of any one of these modes had not been effected, the acquisition order would have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ear from the statutory provisions. When a number of steps are to be taken to achieve a purpose, it often becomes material to know the point of time at which these proceedings commence or can be said to start. The cases under s. 28(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1922 and s. 275 of the IT Act point to the existence of much litigation regarding the point of time when the proceedings can be said to have started. There are five modes of service : which of them is relevant ? It is necessary, to avoid confusion, to specify what marks the commencement or initiation. This point of time is important for two purposes :- (i) The initiation cannot be done without recording reasons for taking action; (ii) The initiation should be within the limitation period specified in the provisions to s. 269-D(1). If the Gazette publication precedes the recording of reasons or is made beyond the time mentioned, the proceedings would be invalid. Subject only to there conditions. I do not think that the order in which the various notices are served is material. 7. I am emboldened in coming to the above conclusion by he consideration that the above I must own, a little strained-construction of the provisions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after, there is no stipulation as to when they should be served or published. Thus, even if the acquisition order is held bad, the initiation having been valid the learned Accountant Member refers in one place to there having been no valid initiation but this, I think is not correct as there is no reason to hold the Gazette notice in this case to be invalid. It is even now open to the competent authority to serve the notices under s. 269D(2) and pass the acquisition order afresh, there being no time limit for the passing of that order either. Sri Gupta, however, raised an objection. He pointed out that such a course would prejudice the category of persons described in cl. (b) of s. 269(1) (i.e. person interested in the property but whose existence was not known to the competent authority). Some of them may not have seen the Gazette notification and if they come to know of the proceedings from the local proclamation or affixation of the notice on the property or the like they would have, by the time these proceedings are taken again, loss their right to make representative against the acquisition, since, in their case, the time limit for filing objections would be 45 days from the G....