https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239342 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the Assessing Officer (AO) must refer the valuation to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) when the assessee disputes the stamp valuation. The tribunal deemed the reference to the DVO under Section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act as mandatory, not discretionary. The AO's failure to provide sufficient material to challenge the DVO's valuation led to the adoption of the DVO's valuation for Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) calculation at Rs. 52,78,714, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239342 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the Assessing Officer (AO) must refer the valuation to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) when the assessee disputes the stamp valuation. The tribunal deemed the reference to the DVO under Section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act as mandatory, not discretionary. The AO's failure to provide sufficient material to challenge the DVO's valuation led to the adoption of the DVO's valuation for Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) calculation at Rs. 52,78,714, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239342