1990 (8) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 30,00,000. under an agreement of sale dated July 16, 1986. The property comprised of a building standing on or about 6,377 sq. mts. of land. It was tenanted and was purchased on the "as is where is" basis. Form No. 37EE was filed by the petitioners and the sellers before the appropriate authority as required under section 269AB(2) of the Income-tax Act. Form No. 37-I was also filed on October 15, 1986. A certificate under section 269UL(3) of the Income-tax Act dated February 5, 1987, was issued under letter dated February 16, 1987, by the appropriate authority to the effect that the authority had no objection to the transfer of the property to the petitioners for sum of Rs. 30,00,000. Some time thereafter, the petitioners received a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n under section 269D/269C is, therefore, not satisfied. Another condition for assumption of jurisdiction under section 269D/ 269C is that the Competent Authority at least prima facie holds that the consideration agreed between the parties is not shown truly in the sale agreement with the object of facilitating the reduction or evasion of the liability of the transferor or facilitating the concealment of any income or assets of the transferee or both. In the present case, the Competent Authority has kept the words "and/or" between the two objects of understatement of consideration. This indicated that the Competent Authority had not applied his mind at all as to whether the understatement was with the first object or the second object or ....