<?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 (6) TMI 69 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61092</link>
    <description>Acquisition under Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act requires a sound factual basis to show that recorded consideration is understated against fair market value. Here, the Tribunal found the valuation report and comparable instances unreliable because they compared dissimilar properties and rested on confused facts. It treated actual rental evidence before and after sale, together with the transferor&#039;s correspondence and other materials, as stronger proof that the transaction was bona fide. On that basis, it held that the stated price was not more than 15 per cent below fair market value and that acquisition was not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:52:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (6) TMI 69 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61092</link>
      <description>Acquisition under Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act requires a sound factual basis to show that recorded consideration is understated against fair market value. Here, the Tribunal found the valuation report and comparable instances unreliable because they compared dissimilar properties and rested on confused facts. It treated actual rental evidence before and after sale, together with the transferor&#039;s correspondence and other materials, as stronger proof that the transaction was bona fide. On that basis, it held that the stated price was not more than 15 per cent below fair market value and that acquisition was not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>