JUDGMENT
G. S. SINGHVI, J. :
Although these appeals filed under s. 269H of the IT Act, 1961, are directed against different orders passed by the Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, in view of the judgment of this Court in CIT vs. Export India Corporation (P.) Ltd. (1996) 219 ITR 461 (P&H), and some other orders passed by this Court, to which reference will be made hereafter, we are deciding them by a common order.
2. Appeals Nos. 7, 8 and 9 of 1980 are directed against the order dt. 21st July, 1980, passed by the Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, whereby the Tribunal accepted the appeals filed by the respondents and quashed the orders passed by the competent authority for acquisition of their properties. Appeal No. 1 of 1981 is directed against the order dt. 7th November, 1979, passed by the Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, in favour of the respondent-Hardev Singh whereby the order of acquisition passed by the competent authority has been quashed. Appeal No. 7 of 1981 is directed against the order dt. 31st January, 1981, passed by the Tribunal whereby it accepted the appeal filed by the respondent and quashed the order of acquisition.
3. During the pendency of the appeals, the provisions of the Act of 1961 have been amended. Chapter XX-A has been deleted and Chapter XX-C has been added therein. At the same time, the CBDT issued Circular No. 455 dt. 16th May, 1986, and declared that acquisition proceedings will not be initiated under s. 269C in respect of an immovable property if the apparent consideration for transfer of the said property is Rs. 5 lakhs or less and where the acquisition proceedings have been initiated by issue of notice under s. 269D, the same will be dropped if the apparent consideration of the immovable property is below Rs. 5 lakhs.
4. In CIT vs. Export India Corporation (P) Ltd. (supra), this Court interpreted Circular No. 455, and held that the same deserves to be applied to pending appeals filed by the Department against the orders passed by the Tribunal.
5. Following the decision of the Division Bench in CIT vs. Export India Corporation (P) Ltd. (supra), this Court has dismissed a number of appeals including ITA No. 4 of 1982 [reported as CIT vs. Gobind Ram (1996) 221 ITR 892 (P&H)] and ITA No. 4 of 1981 [CIT vs. Prem Nath]. While dismissing Appeal No. 4 of 1982, vide its order dt. 6th May, 1996, the Division Bench has independently examined the issue and held that the object with which the circular dt. 16th May, 1986, has been issued deserves to be applied to the cases in which appeals have been filed by the Department.
6. In all these appeals, it is not in dispute that the apparent value of the properties sought to be acquired by the Department is less than Rs. 5 lakhs. Therefore, without going into the merits of the other arguments raised in the appeals and by applying the ratio of the decisions in CIT vs. Export India Corporation (P) Ltd. (supra) and ITA No. 4 of 1982 (supra), we dismiss these appeals.