Allowing the petition the Court held that\u00a0 the show-cause notice was bereft of any materials or details. It did not contain any material to show why the Appropriate Authority felt that an order under section\u00a0269UD(1)\u00a0was required to be made. A reply was filed on April 22, 1993 on behalf of the transferor trust and the petitioner, the buyer. In the order the Appropriate Authority had relied upon a valuation report. Admittedly the report was not provided to the petitioner. Moreover, the Appropriate Authority had given six sale instances but none of these details were provided to the petitioner with the show-cause notice or at any stage. The Court also observed that the approval\u00a0 of Charity Commissioner ensures reasonableness of the agreement of sale and it was a factor which has to be borne in mind by the Income -tax Authorities while exercising its power under section 269UD of the Act .Referred\u00a0\u00a0 Madhukar Sundelal Sheth\u00a0 v. S.K .laul ( 1992 ) 198 ITR 594 ( Bom) (HC) .The order under section\u00a0269UD\u00a0was not valid. The Appropriate Authority was directed to issue no objection certificate under sub-section\u00a0(1)\u00a0of section\u00a0269UL\u00a0of the Act to the petitioner within four weeks of receiving a copy of this order. If there is no such authority, this order should be considered as a \u201cno objection certificate\u201d for the transfer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 269UD : Purchase by Central Government of immoveable properties \u2013Transfer of property by charitable Trust \u2013 Sanction of Charity Commissioner should be taken in to account \u2013 Adequate opportunity was not given – Notice and pre -Emptive purchase was held to be not valid . [ S. 269UC, 269UL, Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, S. 36, Art , 226 ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24612","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-6oY","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24612","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24612"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24612\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29078,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24612\/revisions\/29078"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24612"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}