https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439150 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition made by the Assessing Officer regarding the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property. It was found that the AO did not properly notify the assessee about the rejection of their FMV valuation and the application of a different method. The Tribunal also criticized the CIT(A) for dismissing the assessee's valuation report without substantial reasons and for procedural errors. The appeal of the assessee was successful due to procedural lapses and failure to consider relevant evidence, leading to the removal of the additional tax burden based on the AO's valuation. en-us Tue, 13 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jun 2023 09:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439150 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition made by the Assessing Officer regarding the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property. It was found that the AO did not properly notify the assessee about the rejection of their FMV valuation and the application of a different method. The Tribunal also criticized the CIT(A) for dismissing the assessee's valuation report without substantial reasons and for procedural errors. The appeal of the assessee was successful due to procedural lapses and failure to consider relevant evidence, leading to the removal of the additional tax burden based on the AO's valuation. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439150