<?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>1985 (3) TMI 56 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27411</link>
    <description>In Chapter XXA acquisition proceedings, fair market value must be determined on all relevant valuation material, including comparable auction sales in the locality; excluding such evidence because it was not adopted by the departmental valuer is incorrect. A subsequent lower sale cannot by itself displace a higher market value on the relevant date. An unregistered agreement to sell cannot be relied on to explain the gap between apparent consideration and fair market value, because such evidence is barred in these proceedings. The question whether the arrangement involved one transfer or multiple transfers depends on a fresh appraisal of the evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:22:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=66409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (3) TMI 56 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27411</link>
      <description>In Chapter XXA acquisition proceedings, fair market value must be determined on all relevant valuation material, including comparable auction sales in the locality; excluding such evidence because it was not adopted by the departmental valuer is incorrect. A subsequent lower sale cannot by itself displace a higher market value on the relevant date. An unregistered agreement to sell cannot be relied on to explain the gap between apparent consideration and fair market value, because such evidence is barred in these proceedings. The question whether the arrangement involved one transfer or multiple transfers depends on a fresh appraisal of the evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>