<?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>2018 (3) TMI 530 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356827</link>
    <description>Rule 11UA permits valuation of shares either by the Net Asset Value method or the Discounted Cash Flow method, and the Assessing Officer may scrutinise the valuation report but cannot unilaterally substitute a different method chosen by the assessee. The impugned demand was therefore unsustainable to the extent it rested on replacing the chosen method. In stay proceedings, the Commissioner lacked authority to enhance the pre-deposit requirement from 20% to 50% without the requisite reference under the governing circular, making the enhancement prima facie without authority and supporting protection against coercive recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 10:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 530 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356827</link>
      <description>Rule 11UA permits valuation of shares either by the Net Asset Value method or the Discounted Cash Flow method, and the Assessing Officer may scrutinise the valuation report but cannot unilaterally substitute a different method chosen by the assessee. The impugned demand was therefore unsustainable to the extent it rested on replacing the chosen method. In stay proceedings, the Commissioner lacked authority to enhance the pre-deposit requirement from 20% to 50% without the requisite reference under the governing circular, making the enhancement prima facie without authority and supporting protection against coercive recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>