INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER Vs. N VAJRAM SETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are filed by the IAC, Acquisition Range, Bangalore, and are directed against a common order made on 4th Feb., 1975, by the ITAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore ("the Tribunal"), in Appeals ITA (Acqn.) Nos. 10, 11, 12/Bang./74-75 reversing his order No. C.R. 62/1518 and 1519/73-74 made on 28th Aug. , 1974, under Chapter XX-A of the IT Act, 1961 ("the Act").

(2.) AN immovable property bearing No. 18/2 and 18/3 situated at Vanivilas Road, Bangalore City, consisting of a building and site area measuring 80' x 140' was owned by one Smt. K.S. Lalithamma of Bangalore (the transferor). On 25th June, 1973, the transferor by two instruments of transfer transferred different extents of the said property as detailed in the said instruments, to Sriyuths T.V. Viswanatha Gupta and N. Vajram Setty of Bangalore for a consideration of Rs. 59,000 and Rs. 81,000 respectively. On an examination of the apparent consideration stipulated in the said instruments, the IAC on 6th Dec., 1973, as required by s. 269C of the Act, holding that the fair market value of the property exceeded the apparent consideration by 15% directed issue of notices under s. 269D of the Act which were duly effected in conformity with that provision.

(3.) AGAINST the said order made by the IAC, the transferor and transferees filed appeals under s. 269G of the Act in Appeals Nos. 10 to 12 of 1974-75 before the Tribunal, inter alia, contending that the conclusion reached by the IAC on the evidence on record was erroneous and unjustified. On this contention, the Tribunal disagreed with the conclusion of the IAC and held that the fair market value of the property did not exceed the apparent consideration stipulated in the instruments of transfer. On such conclusion, the Tribunal on 4th Feb., 1975, allowed the appeals of the transferor and the transferees. Hence, these appeals by the IAC under s. 269H of the Act.