https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285094 The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) and AO, confirming the valuation by the Stamp Valuation Authority for computing capital gains, rejecting the cost of improvement claim due to lack of evidence, deeming the DVO's report reliable, and confirming treatment of alleged agricultural income as undisclosed income. The charging of interest under section 234B and initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were also upheld. All appeals were dismissed. en-us Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Dec 2019 10:20:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285094 The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) and AO, confirming the valuation by the Stamp Valuation Authority for computing capital gains, rejecting the cost of improvement claim due to lack of evidence, deeming the DVO's report reliable, and confirming treatment of alleged agricultural income as undisclosed income. The charging of interest under section 234B and initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were also upheld. All appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285094