https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282704 The Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer (AO) was not justified in referring the valuation to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) or adopting the DVO's valuation for the assessment year 2010-11. The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 55A(a) effective from 01.07.2012 did not apply retrospectively. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the addition of Rs. 5,92,550 on account of long-term capital gain was set aside. en-us Wed, 11 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Aug 2019 20:35:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282704 The Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer (AO) was not justified in referring the valuation to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) or adopting the DVO's valuation for the assessment year 2010-11. The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 55A(a) effective from 01.07.2012 did not apply retrospectively. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the addition of Rs. 5,92,550 on account of long-term capital gain was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282704