16 lakhs.
SCR 12 1993 1 SCC 78 1992 6 JT 678 1992 3 SCALE 138 ORDER Kania, C.J. The petitioner herein filed Civil Writ Petition No.
37 I in duplicate were furnished to the appropriate authority as per the requirements of Section 269UC of the Income Tax Act.
That writ petition has been transferred to this Court as a test case.
4.5 lakhs was paid as the advance price.
On 4.2.85 the owner entered into an agreement to transfer the leasehold rights in the said property to the petitioner and a sum of Rs.
The owner of the property is one Jai Lal s o Ghazi Ram.
The relevant facts lie within a narrow companypass.
The order transferring the said Writ Petition was made on 20.9.89.
After getting the report of the registered valuer, the appropriate authority passed an order for the purchase by the Central Government of the said property, namely, the lease hold rights in the land and the ownership of the said building under Section 269UD 1 of the Income Tax Act and served the same on the petitioner in the night of December 15, 1986.
On the same day an agreement for the companystruction of a structure on the plot was entered between the said parties.
The said owner held the said plot under a lease executed by the Delhi Development Authority on 25.2.81.
B 7/108A, situated at Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, admeasuring 253 sq.
In addition, the petitioner was liable under the agreement to pay Rs.
3.4 lakhs to the Delhi Development Authority on account of the unearned increase.
On the companying into force of Chapter XX C of the Income Tax Act, which was brought into effect from 1st October, 1986 by a Notification dated 7.8.86 in the area with which we are companycerned, the said agreement to sell the said property along with Form No.
1992 3 Suppl.
On 9.7.86 a fresh agreement to sell the residential house put up on the aforesaid plot of land along with the leasehold rights in the said land was executed between the parties wherein the owner agreed to transfer to the petitioner his leasehold rights in the said land along with the ownership of the companystruction, namely, the building put up thereon, for Rs.
The petitioner is the intending purchaser of a plot of land bearing No.
2821 of 1989 in the Delhi High Court challenging the validity of the provisions of Chapter XX C inserted in the Income Tax Act, 1961 referred to herein as the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act of 1986.
