https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18913 An order of pre-emptive purchase under section 269UD was held unsustainable where the appropriate authority failed to base its satisfaction on objective material and did not properly evaluate relevant comparable sale instances. The authority relied on one later sale, rejected earlier sales without applying a consistent price-rise adjustment, and treated same-society flats as non-comparable for an incorrect reason. It also did not adequately address factors such as earlier token payment, building condition, claimed FSI difference, and the basis for deduction. The order was quashed because valid satisfaction under section 269UD requires positive, reasoned findings on relevant comparable material showing understatement of consideration. en-us Mon, 26 Jun 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:23:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18913 An order of pre-emptive purchase under section 269UD was held unsustainable where the appropriate authority failed to base its satisfaction on objective material and did not properly evaluate relevant comparable sale instances. The authority relied on one later sale, rejected earlier sales without applying a consistent price-rise adjustment, and treated same-society flats as non-comparable for an incorrect reason. It also did not adequately address factors such as earlier token payment, building condition, claimed FSI difference, and the basis for deduction. The order was quashed because valid satisfaction under section 269UD requires positive, reasoned findings on relevant comparable material showing understatement of consideration. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Jun 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18913