<?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>1995 (9) TMI 35 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18581</link>
    <description>Pre-emptive purchase under Chapter XX-C can be exercised only on disclosed material supporting a prima facie finding that the apparent consideration is substantially below fair market value and that the understatement indicates tax evasion; the order failed because that condition precedent was not established on reliable evidence. The authority also relied on undisclosed and irrelevant grounds, including an unsubstantiated superiority of locality and alleged construction-cost differences, without giving a fair opportunity to respond. As a speaking order was required to record the necessary satisfaction and reflect proper application of mind, the breach of natural justice and absence of disclosed reasons rendered the order invalid and unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:08:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (9) TMI 35 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18581</link>
      <description>Pre-emptive purchase under Chapter XX-C can be exercised only on disclosed material supporting a prima facie finding that the apparent consideration is substantially below fair market value and that the understatement indicates tax evasion; the order failed because that condition precedent was not established on reliable evidence. The authority also relied on undisclosed and irrelevant grounds, including an unsubstantiated superiority of locality and alleged construction-cost differences, without giving a fair opportunity to respond. As a speaking order was required to record the necessary satisfaction and reflect proper application of mind, the breach of natural justice and absence of disclosed reasons rendered the order invalid and unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>