<?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>1978 (9) TMI 15 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36855</link>
    <description>For acquisition under Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act, fair market value must be assessed by reference to the interest actually and effectively transferred, not a larger or merely purported title. The valuation must reflect all relevant depressing or enhancing factors, including title defects, pending disputes, occupation, tenancy restrictions, property condition, and litigation risk; an estimate ignoring such matters is legally infirm. On notice under section 269D, substantial prior individual service of notice before Gazette publication led the court to treat the publication requirement as directory on the facts, and the procedural objection was rejected. The valuation challenge succeeded and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 10:33:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (9) TMI 15 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36855</link>
      <description>For acquisition under Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act, fair market value must be assessed by reference to the interest actually and effectively transferred, not a larger or merely purported title. The valuation must reflect all relevant depressing or enhancing factors, including title defects, pending disputes, occupation, tenancy restrictions, property condition, and litigation risk; an estimate ignoring such matters is legally infirm. On notice under section 269D, substantial prior individual service of notice before Gazette publication led the court to treat the publication requirement as directory on the facts, and the procedural objection was rejected. The valuation challenge succeeded and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36855</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>