https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66055 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the valuation report obtained after the closure of assessment proceedings was invalid and could not be the basis for invoking revisional jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act. The Tribunal also determined that the Assessing Officer lacked authority to refer the valuation question to the Valuation Cell post-assessment closure without a pending proceeding. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the post-assessment valuation report, not related to any proceeding under the IT Act, could not be considered part of the record for revisional purposes. Consequently, the original assessment order dated 28th July, 1986, was restored. en-us Fri, 31 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:29:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66055 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the valuation report obtained after the closure of assessment proceedings was invalid and could not be the basis for invoking revisional jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act. The Tribunal also determined that the Assessing Officer lacked authority to refer the valuation question to the Valuation Cell post-assessment closure without a pending proceeding. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the post-assessment valuation report, not related to any proceeding under the IT Act, could not be considered part of the record for revisional purposes. Consequently, the original assessment order dated 28th July, 1986, was restored. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66055