TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (12) TMI 28
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....28, 1984, the said respondents entered into an agreement to sell the said property, consideration whereof was fixed at the rate of Rs.20,00,000 per acre, amounting to a total consideration of Rs.68 lakhs inclusive of tubewell, electric connection and one room, fridge, etc. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4, in terms of rule 48L of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, filed a statement of transfer of subject property as required in Form No. 37-I together with the said agreement. It was contended that the land in question is agricultural land. A show-cause notice dated March 15, 1995, was issued upon the petitioner as also respondents Nos. 3 and 4 asking them to file various documents/information relating to the said property. The said show-cause notice reads thus: "Dear sirs, I am directed by the appropriate authority, Delhi, to state as under: 2. Statement in Form No. 37-I under rule 48L of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, has been filed on December 6, 1994, in respect of immovable property/agricultural land at Fetehpur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. This statement is signed by the transferors, Svs. Jage Ram and Om Prakash and by Sanjeev Kumar, authorised signatories for R.S. and Co., as trans....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,000 is further added, the total value of the subject property comes to Rs.1,14,90,000 as against the apparent consideration of Rs.68,00,000. 6. You are hereby given an opportunity of being heard in this matter and to show cause as to why pre-emptive purchase order under section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act should not be made. For this purpose, you may appear before the appropriate authority on March 21, 1995, at 10.30 a.m. either personally or through your authorised representative. You are also requested to produce before the appropriate authority on the aforesaid date and time the original title deed of the property together with photocopies thereof for verification and return. In case of failure to arrange representation on the aforesaid date and time, necessary orders will be passed in accordance with law on the basis of material already available on record without any further reference to you. Yours faithfully, (Sd.) S.L. Kanaugia, Income-tax Officer, O/O A.A. Delhi". The petitioner filed a detailed reply vide letter dated March 21, 1995, wherein, inter alia, it had been contended: "(i) That opportunity of being heard as provided by section 269UD(1A) w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmit that the respondents had wrongly proceeded on the basis that the lands in question are not agricultural lands. According to learned counsel, there had been no conversion of the said land and in any event, having regard to the statutory provisions, 10 acres of land is required for constructing commercial building complex. Learned counsel would urge that the area of the said land is 3.35 acres and contended that having regard to the fact that 45 per cent. thereof is to be left out for the roads, the value thereof should not be taken for computation purpose. It was further urged that the respondent authority failed to apply its mind that even if for the sake of arguments, it is treated that the subject property is residential land; the value of the land after paying the external and internal development charges should be Rs.17,30,000 as per the following calculations: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Total land: 3.35 acres or 16,214 square yards or 13,561 square Rs. meters. 45 per cent. left out for the roads = 6,102 square meters (as per the laws of land auth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as been purchased." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. R.D. Jolly, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, would submit that the jurisdiction of this court in a matter of this nature is limited. He would contend that the appropriate authority had arrived at a finding of fact as regards the value of the land upon compliance with the principles of natural justice and, thus, the same cannot be interfered with. Learned counsel would, therefore, contend that no cause for judicial review under article 226 of the Constitution of India has been made out. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that before passing the said order, the sale instances had been taken into consideration. It has further been stated that the documents filed as annexure P5 to the writ petition had never been placed on record by the petitioner before the appropriate authority. He would urge that even no NOC had been issued by the appropriate authority in relation to the said sale instance cited in annexure P5 which pertain to sale of property worth less than Rs.10 lakhs. In the said order, the appropriate authority has found that th....