ORDER : AKIL KURESHI, J. 1. Revenue has filed this appeal against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 22.08.2017 raising following substantial question for our consideration. “Whether on the facts and circumstance of case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (A) in deleting the addition of Rs.3,09,03,547/made by the Assessing Officer after rejecting books of accounts of the assessee on the basis of valuation report of the DVO ?” 2. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal both relied on the decision of this Court in Tax Appeal No.955 of 2013 in case of this very assessee where similar issue was considered in following manner: “[5.0] Now, so far as the question No.B with respect to deletion of enhancement of Rs.1,44,66,770/is concerned, it is required to be noted that the said enhancement was made by the learned CIT(A) on the basis of the valuation report of the DVO. Except the valuation report of the DVO, there was no any other basis by the learned CIT(A). Relying upon the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2011)197 Taxmann 203 and the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Goodluck Automobile (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incometax reported in [2012]26 Taxmann.com 254 (Guj.), the learned ITAT has directed to delete the said enhancement. In the case of Sargam Cinema (Supra), the Honble Supreme Court has held that unless the books of accounts are rejected, there could not have been reference to the DVO. In the present case, admittedly, neither the AO nor the learned CIT(A) had rejected the books of accounts. Under the circumstances, the enhancement of Rs.1,44,66,770/solely on the basis of the report of the DVO, is rightly held to be not permissible. Under the circumstances, no error has been committed by the learned ITAT in deleting the enhancement of Rs.1,44,66,770/. [6.0] In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT. No question of law much less substantial question of law arises in the present appeal and the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed.” 3. In the result, this Tax Appeal is also dismissed.