1992 (5) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....983, according to which the value of the property was Rs. 13,88,000. Acting upon the same, the petitioners were called upon to submit their reply to the report of the Valuation Officer. The petitioners submitted their reply on June 21, 1983, contesting the correctness of the report. Thereupon, the Income-tax Department issued notice to the petitioners and vendors of the house in dispute under section 269D(1) of the Incometax Act, 1961, regarding initiation of proceedings for acquisition of the house as the Department had reasons to believe that the fair market value of the property exceeded the apparent consideration as agreed to between the parties. The petitioners, in reply to the notice, reiterated their stand that the house had in fact ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Grewal 11.8.86. " 11.8.86 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Considering the amount of compensation paid to the petitioners as inadequate, the petitioners claimed solatium at the rate of 30 per cent. and interest on the basis of the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, along with various other amounts by way of compensation, e.g., expenses of the chowkidar incurred by the petitioners during the period the house remained unoccupied and loss due to non-utilisation, etc. However, the claim made by the petitioners, vide orders dated January 6, 1987, and February 11, 1987, informing the petitioners that, sinc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers, that is, Rs. 10,92,500, was by way of compensation paid in accordance with the statutory provisions, that is, the apparent consideration amounting to Rs. 9,50,000 plus 15 per cent. interest thereon. Therefore, the enhanced compensation in respect of any item claimed by the petitioner was not payable by the Income-tax Department. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the writ petition as the additional amounts claimed by the petitioners by way of enhanced compensation, solatium at the rate of 30 per cent. instead of 15 per cent. already paid, interest on compensation from June 21, 1983, additional compensation on account of appreciation of the market value with effect from the aforesaid date, and ....