Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Zeal Real Estate Limited (formerly Insat Leasing & Holding Limited), a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, entered into an agreement dated 18th February 1991 to purchase an apartment from respondent nos.3 and 4 for a consideration of Rs.63,00,000/-. The parties filed a statement in Form 37-I with the Appropriate Authority under the Income Tax Act, 1961. By an order dated 29th April 1991 passed under Section 269UD(1) of the Act, the Appropriate Authority decided to acquire the property. The petitioner challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No.1768 of 1991, in which an interim order dated 12th September 1991 was passed directing the petitioner to hand over possession of the property to the respondents. The petitioner deposited the amount as directed. Subsequently, the first petition was disposed of with a direction to the Appropriate Authority to reconsider the matter. The Appropriate Authority passed a fresh order dated 30th March 2009 again acquiring the property. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition challenging the fresh order. The court considered the validity of the acquisition order and whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount deposited with interest. The court held that the acquisition order was not sustainable as the Appropriate Authority had not complied with the statutory requirements. The court allowed the petition, set aside the acquisition order, and directed the respondents to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of deposit until payment.
Headnote
A) Income Tax - Acquisition of Immovable Property - Section 269UD(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 - Validity of Acquisition Order - The Appropriate Authority passed an order for acquisition of property under Section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner challenged the order by filing a writ petition. The court examined whether the acquisition order was valid and whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount deposited with interest. Held that the acquisition order was not sustainable and the petitioner was entitled to refund with interest (Paras 1-19).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 29th April 1991 passed under Section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Appropriate Authority for acquisition of the property was valid and whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of the amount deposited with interest.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 30th March 2009 passed under Section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and directed the respondents to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of deposit until payment.
Law Points
- Section 269UD(1) of Income Tax Act
- 1961
- Acquisition of immovable property
- Appropriate Authority
- Writ jurisdiction
- Refund with interest
- Non-compliance with statutory requirements
