https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63598 Chapter XXA acquisition proceedings turned on whether the competent authority could determine fair market value and whether notice procedure under section 269D was mandatory. The text states that valuation assistance was incidental to the statutory scheme for testing understatement of consideration, so fair market value could be determined for acquisition purposes. It also records conflicting views on notice sequence: one view treated prior publication in the Official Gazette as a mandatory jurisdictional step, while another treated service before publication as a curable irregularity because the transferees received notice and participated without showing prejudice. The principal order sustained the acquisition, with a separate opinion dissenting on the notice requirement. en-us Sat, 03 May 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 10:13:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63598 Chapter XXA acquisition proceedings turned on whether the competent authority could determine fair market value and whether notice procedure under section 269D was mandatory. The text states that valuation assistance was incidental to the statutory scheme for testing understatement of consideration, so fair market value could be determined for acquisition purposes. It also records conflicting views on notice sequence: one view treated prior publication in the Official Gazette as a mandatory jurisdictional step, while another treated service before publication as a curable irregularity because the transferees received notice and participated without showing prejudice. The principal order sustained the acquisition, with a separate opinion dissenting on the notice requirement. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 03 May 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63598