https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211870 Chapter XX-A acquisition proceedings were upheld where the Competent Authority had prima facie, relevant material to form a rational reason to believe under section 269C that the consideration was understated. Service of notice under section 269D was treated as valid because notice on the transferee-society in effective control was sufficient, and technical defects in wording or publication caused no fatal prejudice. Delay in passing the order was justified by pending ceiling litigation, and denial of cross-examination of the Valuation Officer caused no shown prejudice. Comparative valuation evidence supported understatement of consideration, so the acquisition remained sustainable. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211870 Chapter XX-A acquisition proceedings were upheld where the Competent Authority had prima facie, relevant material to form a rational reason to believe under section 269C that the consideration was understated. Service of notice under section 269D was treated as valid because notice on the transferee-society in effective control was sufficient, and technical defects in wording or publication caused no fatal prejudice. Delay in passing the order was justified by pending ceiling litigation, and denial of cross-examination of the Valuation Officer caused no shown prejudice. Comparative valuation evidence supported understatement of consideration, so the acquisition remained sustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211870