https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291984 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's failure to refer the valuation to a Valuation Officer, despite objections by the assessee, violated the statutory obligation under Section 50C(2). This non-compliance rendered the reworking of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) invalid. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 72,00,000 based on the higher value was deemed unsustainable, leading to the Tribunal setting aside the CIT (Appeals) order and allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the contested addition towards LTCG. en-us Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Dec 2020 10:49:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291984 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's failure to refer the valuation to a Valuation Officer, despite objections by the assessee, violated the statutory obligation under Section 50C(2). This non-compliance rendered the reworking of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) invalid. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 72,00,000 based on the higher value was deemed unsustainable, leading to the Tribunal setting aside the CIT (Appeals) order and allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the contested addition towards LTCG. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291984