- (1.) THIS petition is for issuance of direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 for registration of sale deed dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -2), which the petitioner is entitled to be registered as per law.
(2.) A sale deed was executed between the petitioner and M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited on 10.05.2012. The stamp duty was already affixed and registration fee was deposited. However, the respondents have refused to registered the same.
(3.) M /s Radhika Fibre India Limited, through its director Manoj Aggarwal, has purchased property i.e. plot Nos. 90 and 91, measuring 604.99 sq. yards, situated at Green Park, Hisar, at the rate of Rs. 1,35,40,000/ - in open auction from Prafulla P. Vaidya, authorized person of M/s Indernational Assets Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd., Sector -27, Gurgaon. In the conveyance deed dated 08.12.2011 (Annexure P -1), it was mentioned that the above said property was mortgaged with the State Bank of India and was free from all encumbrances. After purchasing the property, requisite tax was deposited in the office of Municipal Corporation, Hisar, for the year 2010 -11. 'Chulla' tax was also paid by Mr. Manoj Aggarwal to the Municipal Corporation, Hisar. However, later on M/s Radhika Fibre Limited decided to sell the said property in favour of the petitioner for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,40,00,000/ -. Accordingly, a sale deed dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -2) was prepared. After making sale in favour of the petitioner, stamp duty worth Rs. 9,80,000/ - was deposited in State Bank of India. A receipt dated 10.05.2012, in this regard, is attached as Annexure P -3. Registration fee to the tune of Rs. 15,000/ - was also deposited vide challan form dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -4). However, on presentation of the said sale deed, it was not registered by the concerned authorities i.e. respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Thereafter, letter dated 17.05.2012 (Annexure P -5) was written to the Deputy Commissioner, Hisar. The petitioner also made an application dated 22.05.2012 (Annexure P -6) before the Public Grievances Commissioner, Government of Haryana, but no action has been taken thereon till date. On notice, reply has been filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, stating that sale deed 10.05.2012, on presentation, was not registered as there was an attachment order of the Income Tax Department qua the said property. The Tax Recovery officer, vide letter dated 16.11.2006 (Annexure R -1) requested the Tehsildar, Hisar, not to transfer the said property. When the said sale deed was presented for registration, the Income Tax Department, vide letter dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure R -2), was asked, as to if they had any objection to the said registration. The Tax Recovery Officer, vide his letter dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure R -4), informed that huge amount of income tax is outstanding against Sh. P.R. Gupta, original owner of the said property and explanation qua the first sale deed registered, has been called for. It has been further stated that as per letter (Annexure R -4), registration of the property in question could not be done under the Provisions of the Income Tax Act. It is not disputed between the parties that the petitioner had purchased the property in question from M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited. M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited, on the other hand, had purchased this property in an open auction. Sh. P.R. Gupta was the original owner and he had mortgaged the said property with Punjab National Bank for taking the credit facility. The loanee defaulted in making the payment and therefore, by invoking the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SAFFASI Act), the property was auctioned and M/S Radhika Fibre India Limited purchased the said property vide conveyance deed dated 08.12.2011 (Annexure P -1). At the time of purchasing the property, it was free from all encumbrances and charges. The auction purchaser had made a sale consideration of Rs. 1,35,40,000/ - to the auction seller. It is, thereafter, the petitioner purchased the said property from M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited for a sum of Rs. 1,40,00,000/ -. As regards the attachment of property by the Income Tax Department is concerned, Rule 68 -B of the Income Tax Rules is reproduced as under: "68 B Time limit for sale of attached immovable property. (1) No sale of immovable property shall be made under this Part after the expiry of three years from the end of the financial year in which the order giving rise to a demand of any tax, interest, fine, penalty or any other sum, for the recovery of which the immovable property has been attached, has become conclusive under the provisions of section 245 -I or, as the case may be, final in terms of the provisions of Chapter XX: Provided that where the immovable property is required to be resold due to the amount of highest bid being less than the reserve price or under the circumstances mentioned in rule 57 or rule 58 or where the sale is set aside under rule 61, the aforesaid period of limitation for the sale of the immovable property shall stand extended by one year. (2) In computing the period of limitation under sub -rule (1), the period - (i) during which the levy of the aforesaid tax, interest, fine, penalty or any other sum is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or (ii) during which the proceedings of attachment or sale of the immovable property are stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or (iii) commencing from the date of the presentation of any appeal against the order passed by the Tax Recovery Officer under this Schedule and ending on the day the appeal is decided, shall be excluded : Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation for the sale of the immovable property is less than 180 days, such remaining period shall be extended to 180 days and the aforesaid period of limitation shall be deemed to be extended accordingly. (3) Where any immovable property has been attached under this Part before the 1st day of June, 1992, and the order giving rise to a demand of any tax, interest, fine, penalty or any other sum, for the recovery of which the immovable property has been attached, has also become conclusive or final before the said date, that date shall be deemed to be the date on which the said order has become conclusive or, as the case may be, final. (4) Where the sale of immovable property is not made in accordance with the provisions of sub -rule (1), the attachment order in relation to the said property shall be deemed to have been vacated on the expiry of the time of limitation specified under this rule.";