https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779164 ITAT MUMBAI set aside the CIT(A) order and restored the matter to the AO for fresh examination, finding the DVO's report was not confronted with either the AO or the assessee and noting the assessee had produced a registered valuer's report for FMV as on 01-04-1981. The tribunal directed the AO to afford the assessee an opportunity to controvert the DVO report and re-examine valuation issues. The bench observed s.55A is not applicable where a deduction is claimed against sale consideration for computing capital gains. Appeal was partly allowed. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Sep 2025 08:30:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779164 ITAT MUMBAI set aside the CIT(A) order and restored the matter to the AO for fresh examination, finding the DVO's report was not confronted with either the AO or the assessee and noting the assessee had produced a registered valuer's report for FMV as on 01-04-1981. The tribunal directed the AO to afford the assessee an opportunity to controvert the DVO report and re-examine valuation issues. The bench observed s.55A is not applicable where a deduction is claimed against sale consideration for computing capital gains. Appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779164