The definition of immovable property under Section 269ua(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is wide enough to cover the transfer of an industrial undertaking as a going concern.

( 1 ) THE short question involved in this writ application is whether the appropriate authority under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), was justified in not disposing of the petitioners' statement under Form No. 37-I which had been submitted by the petitioners under Section 269uc of the Act.

( 2 ) THE facts are not in dispute. Petitioner No. 1 being desirous of transferring its industrial undertaking at Jagatdal, Barrackpore, North 24-Parganas, to Lipton India Limited as a going concern entered into an agreement with Lipton India Ltd. on November 8, 1991. That agreement records that petitioner No. 1 would transfer the undertaking to Lipton subject to obtaining approval from the authorities concerned including the Reserve Bank of India under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, and the Government of West Bengal under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The agreement envisages the transfer of the undertaking as a going concern together with land, building, machinery, equipment, movable properties, stock-in-trade as well as unionised and management employees of the undertaking with continuity of service and full protection to their existing terms and conditions of service. The consideration in actual terms apart from various other covenants/rights/ obligations was Rs. 14. 87 crores.

( 3 ) ON January 16, 1992, the Reserve Bank of India intimated the petitioners that it was agreeable to the transfer of the undertaking inclusive of land, buildings, plant, machinery, stores, raw materials and finished goods to Lipton as a going concern subject to various conditions.

( 4 ) ON October 22, 1992, the Government of West Bengal, Land and Land Reforms Department informed the petitioner that the Governor has exempted the excess vacant land under Section 20 (1) (a) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, for the purpose of outright transfer to Lipton subject to various conditions.

( 5 ) ON November 30, 1992, a supplemental agreement was entered into between the petitioner and Lipton by which Lipton agreed to be bound by the conditions imposed by the Reserve Bank of India and the Government of West Bengal.

( 6 ) ON November 18, 1992, the petitioner and Lipton filed a statement under Form No. 37-I before the appropriate authority under the Act in respect of the proposed transfer. The statement gave particulars of the land, buildings, plant and machinery, furniture and fixtures and other assets sought to be transferred by the petitioner to Lipton. The amount of consideration was stated as follows :" (a) Rupees 14. 87 crores, as stipulated in Clause 5 of annexure 'a' to the agreement dated November 13, 1992 (annexure T ). (b) Liability in respect of unionised and management employees numbering approximately 240 with continuity of service and full protection to their existing terms and conditions of service which entails substantial liability relating to gratuity, pension, etc. , for services prior to assignment and on account of existing high scale of wages, perquisites and other benefits. (c) Rights/obligations/covenants as per the said agreement dated November 13, 1992 (annexure 1' ). "

( 7 ) ON November 25, 1992, the appropriate authority called for various documents from the petitioner and asked for a detailed break-up of the total consideration and stated that the property was to be inspected.

( 8 ) ON December 9, 1992, the petitioner gave the various particulars in reply to the notice of the appropriate authority and also stated that-"the consideration for the transfer has been stated in Form No. 37-I. It does not consist only of Rs. 14. 87 crores as stated in item No. 20 of your requisition. The proposed transaction is an indivisible, integrated and composite one. The question of giving any itemwise breakup as asked for does not arise. "

( 9 ) ON December 18, 1992, the undertaking was inspected. The petitioner submitted further documents t