KHUSAL CHAND NARAIN DAS HUF Vs. DEPUTY CIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the order dated January 22, 1991, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appropriate Authority), Income-tax Department, Lucknow, and also further commanding the respondents to issue a "no-objection certificate" under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, The petitioner, who is the owner of certain property at Kanpur, entered into an agreement of sale with one Mohammed Ibrahim on September 20, 1988, for sale of the said property for a consideration of Rs. 24 lakhs. The petitioner gave intimation of the said agreement to the appropriate authority as contemplated by Sub-section (3) of Section 269UG. According to Sub-section (1) of Section 269UD, the appropriate authority has to make an order thereunder within two months from the end of the month in which the intimation aforesaid is received by the appropriate authority. THIS means that the authority had to pass an order purchasing the property, if it so chose, on or before February 28, 1990.

(2.) ON February 19, 1990, the appropriate authority passed an order "filing" the intimation filed by the petitioner on the ground that there is a contradiction between the recitals made in the agreement of sale and in the affidavit sworn by the transferor on January 23, 1990. It was pointed out that, while in the agreement of sale, it was stated that the property in question was attached for non-payment of "government dues and tax", the affidavit shows that it was attached for excess profits tax dues. It was pointed out that, even according to the agreement of sale, the property is under attachment and, if so, it cannot be sold by virtue of the prohibition contained in Section 64, Civil Procedure Code. It was observed that the parties have not obtained any permission from the appropriate court for selling the said property.

(3.) IN the writ petition, it is reiterated that the excess profits tax dues having been cleared, the authority had no reasonable basis for "filing" the application filed by the petitioner. A counter-affidavit sworn to by the INspector of INcome-tax posted in the office of the appropriate authority has been filed. It is stated that, for any action to be taken or any order to be passed under Chapter XX-C of the INcome-tax Act, the first requirement is that the property in question should be transferable. IN this case, the property, being under attachment, is not transferable. If so, no further question can arise either of the authority purchasing the property or of issuing a no objection certificate.