https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374415 The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer's reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) for property valuation under Section 55A of the Income Tax Act was unjustified for the assessment year 2011-12. Additionally, the Tribunal found the AO's substitution of DVO's valuation for Long Term Capital Gain invalid as the amendment to Section 55A was not retrospective. The exemption claimed under Section 54B was allowed, even though the new agricultural land was purchased in the name of the assessee's son, as the primary purpose of the section is to support agriculturist families. Consequently, the assessee's appeal was successful, and the lower authorities' orders were overturned. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Mar 2019 15:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374415 The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer's reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) for property valuation under Section 55A of the Income Tax Act was unjustified for the assessment year 2011-12. Additionally, the Tribunal found the AO's substitution of DVO's valuation for Long Term Capital Gain invalid as the amendment to Section 55A was not retrospective. The exemption claimed under Section 54B was allowed, even though the new agricultural land was purchased in the name of the assessee's son, as the primary purpose of the section is to support agriculturist families. Consequently, the assessee's appeal was successful, and the lower authorities' orders were overturned. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374415