https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337769 The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision to sustain the reference to the Valuation Officer under Section 142A was contrary to law as the books of account were not rejected, as required by legal precedents. Additionally, the Court found that the addition under Section 69B based solely on the valuation officer's report was not supported by sufficient material, contravening legal principles. Therefore, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of adhering to established legal principles in such matters. en-us Wed, 07 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:17:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337769 The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision to sustain the reference to the Valuation Officer under Section 142A was contrary to law as the books of account were not rejected, as required by legal precedents. Additionally, the Court found that the addition under Section 69B based solely on the valuation officer's report was not supported by sufficient material, contravening legal principles. Therefore, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of adhering to established legal principles in such matters. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337769