https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27545 Service of notices under section 269D(2)(a) before publication of the Gazette notice under section 269D(1) was treated as a procedural irregularity, not a jurisdictional defect, so the acquisition proceedings were not void on that ground. The challenge to jurisdiction therefore failed. Fair market value under Chapter XX-A had to be fixed as on the date of transfer using the legally appropriate valuation method, with comparable sales as the primary approach and the rental method only where comparable sales data were unavailable. Because the valuation below did not apply the correct principles on the evidence available, the valuation finding was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 14:30:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27545 Service of notices under section 269D(2)(a) before publication of the Gazette notice under section 269D(1) was treated as a procedural irregularity, not a jurisdictional defect, so the acquisition proceedings were not void on that ground. The challenge to jurisdiction therefore failed. Fair market value under Chapter XX-A had to be fixed as on the date of transfer using the legally appropriate valuation method, with comparable sales as the primary approach and the rental method only where comparable sales data were unavailable. Because the valuation below did not apply the correct principles on the evidence available, the valuation finding was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27545