COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RATTAN CHAND SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A piece of land, bearing No. 126, Raja Garden, New Delhi, was sold by Rattan Chand Sood to Om Prakash under a sale deed dt. 28th Feb., 1973, for a consideration, stated in the sale deed, to be Rs. 19,992. Om Prakash in turn sold the property to Piara Singh by a sale deed dt. 20th July, 1973, for Rs. 47,000. Piara Singh, in his turn, put up a construction on the plot and transferred the plot and the building to Mool Chand Nayyar and Bimla Devi under two sale deeds dt. 30th April, 1975, for a consideration of Rs. 48,000 each.

(2.) IN respect of the first of the above sales, viz., the one dt. 28th Feb., 1973, a notice under s. 269D(1) of the INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was published in the Official Gazette on 28th July, 1973. Subsequently, notices were also served on the transferee, namely, Om Prakash as well as a tenant who was stated to be in possession of the property, one Shri Kharbanda. In the course of these proceedings, the Department came to know about the subsequent transfers and thereupon notices were also issued to Piara Singh as well as Mool Chand and Bimla Devi. The Competent Authority eventually came to the conclusion that the property had been transferred by Rattan Chand Sood to Om Parkash for an apparent consideration which was less than its fair market value and that the consideration, as agreed to between the parties, had not been truly stated in the instrument of transfer with the twin objects mentioned in S. 269F(6) of the Act. Therefore, after obtaining the approval of the CIT, the Competent Authority passed an order under S. 269F(6) acquiring the property under Chapter XX -A.

(3.) THE CIT has preferred these three appeals against the three respondents. When these appeals came to be heard by us, a statement was made before us by counsel for the respondent that Mool Chand, one of the respondents, had died about 5 years ago. Counsel also stated that he wanted to withdraw even from representing Bimla Devi. It has further come to our knowledge that Mool Chand and Bimla Devi also transferred the property to Sushila Madan on 6th Oct., 1978. The result of this development was that none of the three respondents to these appeals had any live interest therein. They have sold away the property and received the moneys in respect thereof and they will not in any manner be affected by the acquisition order that has been passed and is sought to be got restored by the Department.