(M/S.) PADMATEX ENGINEERING LTD Vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (ACQUISITION) RANGES I AND II, AHMEDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which requires consideration in these two petitions is:

(2.) It is stated that Mafatlal Engineering was unable to continue its operations of manufacturing activities at the Baroda works and had closed it down with effect from 20th July 1984. It is also stated therein that the Deputy Commissioner of Labour had suggested during the discussions in his office between the representatives of Mafatlal Engineering and the representatives of its workmen, to explore the possibility of reopening the Baroda Works, to avoid unemployment and post-unemployment hardships and sufferings that may fall on the employees of Mafatlal Engineering on the closure of the Baroda Unit. On that basis, by the said settlement, Padmatex agreed to continue in service almost all the labourers and other staff members of Mafatlal Engineering, and an agreement of sale of the said works at Baroda including its land, superstructure and machinery was executed between Mafatlal Engineering as the Vendor and Padma-tax as the Purchaser. As per the agreement of sale, the entire property was sold at an aggregate price of Rs. 2,25,07,745/-. The agreement further provided that the price of the immovable property described in the first schedule of the agreement of sale was fixed at Rs. 67,50,021/-.

(3.) The said agreement also provided that the sale shall be completed after obtaining