https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20459 The court allowed the petition, quashing the notice issued under section 269D(1) of the Income-tax Act due to vagueness and lack of material evidence for tax evasion. It found the property valuation unfair as crucial factors were ignored, rendering the valuation inappropriate. The court emphasized the need for material evidence to initiate proceedings under section 269C and interpreted ulterior motives for tax evasion under section 269C(1). Consequently, the court invalidated the initiation of proceedings under section 269C, ruling in favor of the petitioner and restraining further action by the respondents. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:04:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20459 The court allowed the petition, quashing the notice issued under section 269D(1) of the Income-tax Act due to vagueness and lack of material evidence for tax evasion. It found the property valuation unfair as crucial factors were ignored, rendering the valuation inappropriate. The court emphasized the need for material evidence to initiate proceedings under section 269C and interpreted ulterior motives for tax evasion under section 269C(1). Consequently, the court invalidated the initiation of proceedings under section 269C, ruling in favor of the petitioner and restraining further action by the respondents. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 21 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20459