https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359065 A reasoned fair market valuation supported by an approved valuer's report and comparable instances cannot be displaced merely by Sub-Registrar guideline value without proper technical examination, so the assessee's 01.04.1981 valuation was upheld. By contrast, the brokerage claim failed for want of documentary proof, the section 54 exemption was denied because the residential house was purchased outside the prescribed one-year pre-transfer window, and the cash deposits were treated as unexplained because the alleged sale of household items and furniture was not supported by reliable evidence. Partial relief was therefore granted only on the valuation issue. en-us Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Apr 2018 06:59:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359065 A reasoned fair market valuation supported by an approved valuer's report and comparable instances cannot be displaced merely by Sub-Registrar guideline value without proper technical examination, so the assessee's 01.04.1981 valuation was upheld. By contrast, the brokerage claim failed for want of documentary proof, the section 54 exemption was denied because the residential house was purchased outside the prescribed one-year pre-transfer window, and the cash deposits were treated as unexplained because the alleged sale of household items and furniture was not supported by reliable evidence. Partial relief was therefore granted only on the valuation issue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359065