TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (10) TMI 36
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. A.A/MDS/No. 2(243)5 of 1998-99, dated May 28, 1999, passed under section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Pending the writ petitions, in W. M. P. No. 13920 of 1999 in W. P. No. 9793 of 1999, the petitioner has prayed for an order of injunction and only notice was ordered. In W. M. P. No. 13921 of 1999 in W. P. No. 9793 of 1999, the writ petitioner prayed for stay of the impugned proceedings and interim stay was granted on June 11, 1999. In W. M. P. No. 14157 of 1999 in W. P. No. 9956 of 1999, the petitioners have prayed for stay and interim stay was granted by this court. W. M. P. Nos. 16382 of 2000 in W. P. No. 9793 of 1999 is moved by Praba Venkatachalam and Vandana Venkat, respectively, the wife and daughter of the transferor C. R. Venkatachalam praying that they may be impleaded as party in W. P. No. 9793 of 1999. In W. P. No. 16383 of 2000 in W. P. No. 9793 of 1999 the said Praba Venkatachalam and Vandana Venkat sought for a direction directing the appropriate authority to disburse the sum of Rs. 19 lakhs to the two petitioners being the amount charged as per the decree of the civil court on the property. In W. M. P. No. 28572, the said Praba Venkatachalam and Va....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment in Form No. 37-I in respect of the agreement dated February 10, 1999, entered between themselves. The first respondent issued a show cause notice under sub-section (IA) of section 269UD of the Income-tax Act, dated April 23, 1999, to the transferor and transferees along with the valuation report citing two comparable sale instances in the same locality calling upon them to show cause as to why the property should not be purchased by the Department under section 269UD of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The transferor and transferees submitted their objections on May 10, 1999, to the said show cause notice objecting to the exercise of the right of pre-emptive purchase under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. After considering the objections submitted by the transferor and transferees the first respondent-appropriate authority passed an order under section 269UD(1) on May 28, 1999, exercising its pre-emptive right to purchase the property for Rs. 27,60,670 after following the procedure prescribed under Chapter XX-C and after considering the relevant materials. The first respondent took the assistance of the Superintending Engineer for preparing the valuation reports. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and daughter initiated action for maintenance and marriage expenditure and a settlement was arrived at ; (f) The property has no commercial use or value ; (g) The real estate market has gone down during 1998-99 and market of residential properties were going down and in low ebb ; (h) Multi-storeyed building is not permissible in the street in terms of the CMDA and the Corporation Rules ; (i) The tenant is in occupation and no chance of getting possession if the property is sold to a third party and therefore the tenant alone has come forward to purchase and the owner has to bargain the price which is a fair market value and that there is no material to conclude that the apparent consideration agreed to is lower by 38.6 per cent. as concluded ; (j) Two sales have been taken as comparative sales which were the subject matter of proceedings under Chapter XX-C and the same should not have been taken into consideration ; (k) Two sales which the petitioner has relied upon has not been taken into consideration and ignored. The failure to take into consideration with the above aspects vitiates the proceedings passed by the first respondent and the same is liable to be qua....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perty owned by the transferor has been ordered to be purchased under Chapter XX-C. An ex-parte decree has also been passed at the instance of the wife and daughter against the transferor and therefore the amount that is acknowledged as due to them should be directed to be paid out to the said two or a suitable direction be issued in this respect in the event of this court sustaining the order passed by the competent authority. While pointing out the miserable condition in which the wife of the transferor is placed and undergoing chemotherapy and radiation treatment for cancer is suffering a lot for want of funds and they should be alleviated from the miserable condition and any delay will result in the said two, namely, the unfortunate wife and daughter of the transferor may have to suffer further. On consideration of the impugned proceedings and the rival contentions, the following points arise for consideration : (A) Whether the order passed by the first respondent-appropriate authority under Chapter XX-C is vitiated on one or more of grounds advanced by the petitioners ? (B) Whether the action of the appropriate authority is without jurisdiction ? (C) Whether the ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tor is ignored the order may become vitiated has to be applied if the facts of the case warrants." Again in Union of India v. Shatabadi Trading and Investment (P.) Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 93, the apex court laid down that - "It is trite to say that the proceedings arising under article 226 of the Constitution are in the nature of judicial review and such review could be only in respect of the process of decision and not the decision itself". The apex court held thus : "This court in Appropriate Authority v. Smt. Sudha Patil [1999] 235 ITR 118 held that merely because no appeal is provided for against the order of the appropriate authority directing the compulsory acquisition by the Government, the supervisory power of the High Court would not get enlarged nor can the High Court exercise an appellate power while examining the correctness of the conclusion arrived at by such Tribunal. On the materials, if two views are possible, even then it would not be possible for the High Court to substitute its conclusion for that of the Tribunal. It is trite to say that the proceedings arising under article 226 of the Constitution are in the nature of judicial review and such review could be onl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00 per ground. (2) The agreement dated September 20, 1998 in respect of door No. 42, 11 Main Road, Kasturba Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-20, and the land area being 8,795 sq. ft. and building area Z845 sq. ft. The admitted sale consideration being Rs. 1,14,00,000 it works out to Rs. 30,06,000 per ground on the basis of scrap value of the building. The property in question is door No. 3, Krishnamachari Avenue, Adyar, Chennai-20. By all standards the subject property and the two relevant and comparable sale transactions are located in the same locality and it is not being pointed out that those two properties are located in different localities with better advantages or better situation. The width of the street is practically the same in respect of item No. 1. So also item No. 2. The said two items also are not commercial buildings, nor they are located in a commercial locality like the subject matter. Merely there is a traffic meridian or traffic regulations or U-turn traffic regulation in force to reach the property, it cannot be stated that the subject property is inferior in any way to the two comparable sales. The traffic regulation or restriction would in other words show that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iod. Yet, after giving credit to the rate of fall in price, for the years in question, namely 1997-98 as well as 1998-99, i.e., spread over a period of 19 months, the Committee in its view has rightly accepted the general short fall or slump in price in real estate, in its estimate allowed a fall in price at 12 per cent. and on that basis also it has been rightly pointed out that the sale value is lower by 38.6 per cent. when compared to the land rate worked in para. 5 of the order. So the competent authority has taken note of the fall in real estate market between 1997-98 and it has not omitted to consider this aspect of the matter. The contention advanced in this respect does not deserve any further consideration, nor is the order of the appropriate authority liable to be interfered with on this ground. Mr. R. Krishnamurthi, learned senior counsel, next contended that the appropriate authority has, rejected the two sales relied upon or referred to by the transferor and transferees to sustain their contention that the price agreed to is a fair value. Door Nos. 14 and 15, Srinivasmurthi Avenue, Adyar, Chennai-20, which consisting of a flat of plinth area of 1,246 sq. ft., and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at, the only daughter of the transferor. The suit is of the year 1997. The subject matter of agreement in question was entered on February 10, 1999. But till then, neither the amount has been paid, nor an execution petition has been levied. It is admitted that the wife and the daughter of the transferor have secured a decree, but they have not proceeded as presumably it was on assurance to settle and it is not as if there has been any compulsion or compelling necessity to dispose of the property without granting time. In fact the recital in the sale agreement stipulated that a sum of Rs. 17,00,000 be paid to Mrs. Prabha Venkatachalam. As seen from the fact it is clear that even today the daughter and the wife of the transferor are yet to realise the amount and they are before this court seeking for a direction. The wife and daughter have been caught between the transferor and the appropriate authority and their condition is pathetic or miserable. Yet, so far they have not realised a pie. The contention that it was a distress sale has not been accepted. It may be that a claim was pending on the date and a decree has been passed. But the transferor was not under compulsion at all ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... landlord and tenant between the transferor and the transferees. The recital in the sale agreement which has been rightly pointed out does not reflect any existing tenancy. Had there been a tenancy as rightly pointed out by the competent authority the transferor and transferees would not have failed to provide the stipulations in this respect in the agreement. The transferees are residents of different place and there is nothing to show they were in occupation as tenants at the material point of time. The agreement as well as the form filed will belie the claim of tenancy. This is a valid reason for the appropriate authority rejecting this contention of the tenancy and therefore this contention also fails. Nextly, it was contended that the area is congested or polluted and therefore it did not attract a fair price. This aspect has been rightly considered and rejected while pointing out that there is neither pollution, nor is there traffic disturbance. Nor is there automobile pollution or traffic pollution as the property is located about 300 feet away from the L. B. Road. The comparable sales relied on by the competent authority is identically located be it the same advantage or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts. Therefore, on the facts, this court holds that the proceedings of the appropriate authority are not liable to be interfered with. There were sufficient materials before the competent authority on the basis of which it was justified in holding that the consideration stated in the document had not been truly stated and there are materials to show that the parties by the transaction were seeking to reduce or evade the transferor's liability for tax in respect of any income arising from the transfer and there is an attempt to conceal the income or money which they have failed to disclose. There was comparable sale in the very area and the reasons assigned by the appropriate authority are cogent and not liable to be interfered. Thus in any view of the matter all the contentions advanced by learned senior counsel, Mr. R. Krishnamurthi have to be negatived and no case has been made out for interference. The writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. As regards the direction petitions filed by the wife and daughter of the, transferor, there is every justification to issue a suitable direction in this respect to the appropriate authority so that the wife and daughter would not suf....