https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211028 The appeal by the revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee was allowed. The ITAT concluded that the reference to the DVO under section 142A was invalid, and the addition based on the DVO's report was not justified due to the lack of incriminating evidence and the AO's failure to reject the books of account. The decision reinforced the principle that the burden of proof lies with the revenue to establish any understatement or concealment of income before making additions based on valuation reports. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Mar 2012 09:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211028 The appeal by the revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee was allowed. The ITAT concluded that the reference to the DVO under section 142A was invalid, and the addition based on the DVO's report was not justified due to the lack of incriminating evidence and the AO's failure to reject the books of account. The decision reinforced the principle that the burden of proof lies with the revenue to establish any understatement or concealment of income before making additions based on valuation reports. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211028