<?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>2006 (11) TMI 152 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13323</link>
    <description>In compulsory purchase proceedings under Chapter XX-C, prior disclosure of the comparable sale instances relied on is required so the affected party has a fair opportunity to meet the material; disclosure only at the hearing was treated as a breach of natural justice and the order was invalid. The order was also found unsustainable on merits because it did not analyse material features relevant to fair comparison, including the building, floor position, construction details, amenities, parking, view and surroundings, or explain how those factors established undervaluation. The impugned compulsory purchase order was quashed and the authority was directed to issue the no objection certificate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 11:29:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 152 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13323</link>
      <description>In compulsory purchase proceedings under Chapter XX-C, prior disclosure of the comparable sale instances relied on is required so the affected party has a fair opportunity to meet the material; disclosure only at the hearing was treated as a breach of natural justice and the order was invalid. The order was also found unsustainable on merits because it did not analyse material features relevant to fair comparison, including the building, floor position, construction details, amenities, parking, view and surroundings, or explain how those factors established undervaluation. The impugned compulsory purchase order was quashed and the authority was directed to issue the no objection certificate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13323</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>