https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13601 A valuation report by itself could not sustain an addition for unexplained investment in construction where the assessee was engaged in construction activity and the alleged amount would only affect the cost of construction rather than create a separate taxable income. The Court further noted that reference to a Valuation Officer is confined to the limited purposes expressly permitted by law. On the same footing, the estimated profit addition based on the same valuation material also failed, and the Tribunal's deletion of both additions was upheld against the Revenue. en-us Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 May 2009 15:46:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13601 A valuation report by itself could not sustain an addition for unexplained investment in construction where the assessee was engaged in construction activity and the alleged amount would only affect the cost of construction rather than create a separate taxable income. The Court further noted that reference to a Valuation Officer is confined to the limited purposes expressly permitted by law. On the same footing, the estimated profit addition based on the same valuation material also failed, and the Tribunal's deletion of both additions was upheld against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13601