2000 (7) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ming provision after the expiry of 90 days from the date of submission of the form being Form No. 37-I under the Income-tax Rules, 1962. In this context, Mr. Singhvi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, cited a judgment reported in DLF Universal Ltd. v. Appropriate Authority [2000] 243 ITR 730 (SC) in paragraph 20 (page 752 of 243 ITR), whereof it is held that the statement in Form No. 37-I was in order and was furnished to the appropriate authority within the time prescribed. The appropriate authority did not make any order within three months of its receipt of the said statement for purchase of the immovable properties in question by the Central Government. That being the position, the appropriate authority is duty bound to iss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lised FAR. However, by the process of correspondence more time has elapsed within the prescribed three months period. In fact, the Superintending Engineer of the office of the income-tax authority has taken initiative as per the annexure from January 18, 2000, and even thereafter certain clarifications were sought for on February 8/11, 2000. But even after several correspondence nothing was finalised as a result where of the authority concerned rejected in giving no objection certificate on May 19, 2000, which, according to the petitioners, is after the expiry of the 90 days period, that is May 7, 2000. Mr. Rupen Mitra, learned senior counsel appearing for the authority. contended before this court that in the instant case deeming provis....