TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (10) TMI 335
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 14, 1977 answered the question in the affirmative and held that the transfers were made in anticipation of and with a view to avoiding or defeating the objects of the Act. The Lands Reforms Appellate Tribunal (the Appellate Tribunal), however, by its order dated December 17,1977 reversed the findings of the Tribunal and held as under: Therefore, in these cases we hold that the declarant had given a reasonable explanation for the sale of the lands and there was no intention to avoid the provisions of the Land Ceiling Act. Accordingly, we hold on point-1 that all the sales effected by the appellant, his wife and his son are true, genuine and supported by consideration and they were effected for the expansion of their industry and actually the amounts were invested for such expansion of the Sugar Factory and it cannot be said that they were intended to defeat or avoid the provisions of the Land Ceiling Act. It follows that all the extents covered by all the sale deeds have to be excluded from the holding of the appellant's family unit, for the purpose of computation of the ceiling area of the appellants. Revision-petitions filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh under Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to avoiding or defeating any such law would be on the land owners. 4. The case of the respondents before the Tribunal was that as early as 1946 they obtained two licences for setting up of textile industry and sugar industry. According to them during the period from 1939 to 1960 large areas of lands were sold by them for the purposes of setting up of the two industries. The precise reason, according to the respondents, for the sale of the lands in dispute was to expand the sugar industry for which a valid licence was obtained. 5. The Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence before it and taking into consideration the relevant material on the record come to the following conclusions : (1) That the recitals in the sale deeds did not mention that the purpose for the sale of lands was to invest the proceeds in the expansion of sugar industry rather it was mentioned that the lands were not convenient for personal cultivation and reasonable price was offered by the purchasers ; (2) That in respect of all the sales only initial payments were accepted and pronotes were got executed in favour of the respondents for the major portion of the sale amounts. (3)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sugar industry was mooted sometime in June 1970 but it was two years thereafter in April 1972 that the application for licence to expand the industry was made and the licence, in fact, was granted on November 26, 1973. According to the learned Counsel, in December, 1971, when the lands were sold, there was no question of spending any money on expansion of the industry because even the application for licence was made on April 26,1972 and the licence was granted as late as November 26, 1973. It was forcefully contended by Mr. Chari that the only urgency to sell the land in December, 1971 was to defeat the provision of the Act which was on its way and came to be enforced on May 2, 1972. Needless to say that from May 2,1972 there was total prohibition on the sale of the lands which were subject matter of the Act. There is plausibility in the argument of Mr. Chari but we proceed on the assumption that the sales in dispute were made with a view to meet the expenses to be incurred on the proposed expansion of the sugar industry. 8. Mr. Venugopal contended that the sales in dispute, being valid and genuine, were made in good faith. According to him the sales made in good faith, cannot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted by a three Judge-Bench order of this Court in Meria Venkata Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. Civil Appeal No. 2649/77 decided on February 11, 1992. In the said case while interpreting Section 7(1) of the Act this Court held as under : As far as the transactions between 24.1.1971 and 2.5.1972 are concerned, the High Court has accepted the conclusions reached by the Tribunal. The High Court has pointed out that a large extent of over 220 acres of land was alienated by the appellant and his wife within a short period of eight months between 4.6.1971 and 1.2.1972. It was not the case of the appellant that there was any pressure on the estate for the discharge of debts or that the alienations were in fact made for discharge of, or meeting any binding debts, or for meeting the marriage or educational expenses of any member of the family. It was on the basis of this finding that the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the said transactions were made in anticipation of the said Act and the High Court was, in our view, justified in declining to interfere with the same. 10. In the present case the respondents might be wanting to raise money for the expansion of the su....