Valmiki is also saying same thing.
taruNaadityasaMkaashaaM taptakaaJNchanabhuuShaNaam |
raktaambaradharaaM baalaaM niilakuJNchitamuurdhajaam || 6-118-3
akliShTamaalyaabharaNaaM tathaaruupaamaninditaam |
dadau raamaaya vaidehiimaN^ke kR^itvaa vibhaavasuH || 6-118-4
3-4. kR^itvaa= bearing; aN^ke= in his arms; baalaa viadehiim= the youthful Seetha; taruNaaditya samkaasham= who was shining brightly as the rising sun; taptakaaN^chana bhuuShaNaam= was decked in ornaments of refined gold; raktaambaradharaam= and attired in a red robe; niilakuN^chita muurdhajaam= and wore dark curly hari; akliShTa maalyaabharaNaam= who was further adorned with ornaments of flowers which had not abraded (on her entering the fire and coming out of it); aninditaam= who was absolutely beyond reproach; tathaaruupam= and looked just the same (as she did while entering the flames); vibhaavasuH= the fire-god; dadau= restored (her); raamaaya= to Rama.
Bearing in his arms the youthful Seetha, who was shining brightly as the rising sun, was decked in ornaments of refined gold, attired in a red robe and wore dark curly hair, who was further adorned with ornaments of flowers, which had not abraded (on her entering the fire and coming out of it), who was absolutely beyond reproach and looked just the same (as she did while entering the fire and coming out of it), who was absolutely beyond reproach and looked just the same (as she did while entering the flames), the fire-god restored her to Rama.
You still dare to deny it