<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1993 (4) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64250</link>
    <description>Service of the Chapter XX-A notice was upheld because publication in the official gazette was within time and personal service attempts, including affixture, were made when the parties were unavailable. The initiation under section 269C was held unsustainable because the Competent Authority lacked relevant material showing a rational belief that the fair market value exceeded the apparent consideration by the statutory margin. Reliance on valuation material for a dissimilar property, without properly accounting for the full apparent consideration, including unearned increase liability, vitiated the jurisdictional basis for acquisition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:37:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (4) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64250</link>
      <description>Service of the Chapter XX-A notice was upheld because publication in the official gazette was within time and personal service attempts, including affixture, were made when the parties were unavailable. The initiation under section 269C was held unsustainable because the Competent Authority lacked relevant material showing a rational belief that the fair market value exceeded the apparent consideration by the statutory margin. Reliance on valuation material for a dissimilar property, without properly accounting for the full apparent consideration, including unearned increase liability, vitiated the jurisdictional basis for acquisition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>