TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (10) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia only on 4-7-1985 and it was only on 7-7-1985 when he came to his father-in-law's place in South Kanara district that he became aware of the order which was served on his father-in-law who was the power of attorney holder of the appellant, and thereafter he came to Bangalore on 10-7-1985, discussed the matter with his advocate and filed the appeal. It is pleaded that the delay of one day should, therefore, be condoned. On the other hand, it was pointed out that on behalf of the revenue that under section 269G(1) proviso, the Tribunal may permit an appeal to be presented within such further period as may be specified, for sufficient cause, on an application made by the appellant before the expiry of the said period of 45 days. It was submitted that since the application for condonation of the delay has been filed after the expiry of 45 days, the delay cannot be condoned and the appeal should not be entertained. It was argued on behalf of the assessee that in spite of that wording of the proviso to section 269G(1), recourse should be had to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the delay should be condoned. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Madhya ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d walls and tiled roof whose annual municipal tax was only Rs. 48 and that he will not be able to attend personally to the hearing as he was staying in Bombay. The power of attorney agent of the transferee by his letter dated 14-3-1980 furnished the copies of the document, site plan and particulars of the building and other details. He also stated that he was 68 years of age and he may be exempted from appearing in person. The IAC thereafter referred the matter to the valuation cell. The Assistant Valuation Officer gave a report dated 20-9-1980, estimated the value of the property at Rs. 1,57,000. He found that there were two sales of vacant land one of 28 cents in R. S. No. 507/1B at the rate of Rs. 4,000 per cent and another of 90 cents in R.S. No. 412 also at Rs. 4,000 per cent in February 1979 and December 1978, respectively. He was of the opinion that those two sites being residential properties situated in newly formed layout very near to the city and the property to be valued being far in the interior with an approach by a very narrow lane of only 3 feet width where vehicular traffic was not possible, the land could be estimated at Rs. 3,000 per cent. He also found that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; 1,065 Stamp papers 27 Cost of construction of the compound wall as per contractor's bill 13,614 Renovation of the house, cess pit and clearing of plot as per contractor's bill 7,000 &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; or 1,50,000" The note-sheet shows that on 12-1-1982 the case was posted for hearing on 28-1-1982 but no enquiry appears to have been held on that date. The next entry is dated 28-9-1984 when draft proposals to the Commissioner were put up. The IAC then forwarded a draft order on 29-9-1984 for the approval of the Commissioner which was granted on 20-5-1985. Thereafter he passed the impugned order on 25-5-1985 acquiring the property. 4. The contentions --- The first objection of the appellant is that the consent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Commissioner order the acquisition of the property. An appeal has to be disposed of by the Tribunal expeditiously and the Tribunal shall endeavour to dispose it of within 90 days from the date of presentation. Thus, the entire Chapter XX-A exudes a sense of urgency in the disposal of these proceedings though no specific time limit has been prescribed under section 269F for making an order of acquisition after hearing the objections of the parties. 6. It is in this background of the scheme of the Act the appellant claims that an order made on 25-5-1985 after a lapse of five years after the appellant agreed for the acquisition of the property by his letter dated 21-10-1980 is an abuse of discretion and should be annulled. Wades on Administrative Law, Fifth edn., at p. 387 has stated that the delay in performing a legal duty may also amount to an abuse which the law will remedy but it will be pertinent to enquire whether there was an excessive deferment of the authorities of the legal duty to the detriment of the party concerned. Under section 269F if the competent authority is satisfied that the fair market value of the immovable property exceeds Rs. 1 lakh and the fair market ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to Rs. 10,000. The value fixed by the valuer was Rs. 1,57,000. That value was an estimate made on the basis of sales of two properties which were far away and in a well laid out residential locality as admitted by the valuer himself. On the other hand, the property in question had a great disadvantage that it was unapproachable by vehicular traffic and was quite in the interior being nearly a furlong from the main road. The municipal tax was only Rs. 46 and the revenue assessment was only Rs. 6.50. The building was dilapidated. The document states that the property was being sold because the vendor was quitting the place and shifting to Bombay and the purchaser was purchasing it because it was in the vicinity of his residence. The document itself states that the parties have agreed to fix the value at Rs. 1 lakh considering the disabilities of the property. There is nothing to suggest that the value fixed mutually between the parties is not itself the market value of the property as it would normally be. The estimate of the land value at Rs. 3,000 per cent is itself quite arbitrary and may not reflect the correct market value at all. The apparent consideration works out to Rs. 2,0....