https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218775 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, declaring the reference to the Valuation Officer under section 55A(b)(ii) of the IT Act as invalid based on past judgments and the Jurisdictional High Court's ruling. Regarding the deduction for lawyer's fee without documentary evidence, the Tribunal referred the matter back to the AO for a fresh review in alignment with a similar case, partially allowing the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Nov 2012 13:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218775 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, declaring the reference to the Valuation Officer under section 55A(b)(ii) of the IT Act as invalid based on past judgments and the Jurisdictional High Court's ruling. Regarding the deduction for lawyer's fee without documentary evidence, the Tribunal referred the matter back to the AO for a fresh review in alignment with a similar case, partially allowing the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218775