2015 (9) TMI 1051 - HC - Income Tax

High Court upholds ITAT's decision on property valuation for income tax, no substantial question of law

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Versus Sh. Avtar Kukreja

The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal challenging the valuation of immovable properties for income tax assessment, citing no substantial question ... Addition on valuation of immovable properties - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that:- It is not disputed that for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2006-07 arising from the same order raising similar issue have already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.5.2015 [2015 (6) TMI 145 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] holding that the findings are purely questions of fact. Accordingly, no substantial question of law arises in these appeals. The appeals are dismissed. Issues:1. Valuation of immovable properties for income tax assessment.2. Competence of registered valuer in determining property value.3. Compliance with due procedure of law in property valuation.Issue 1: Valuation of immovable properties for income tax assessmentThe appeal before the High Court involved the revenue challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on the basis of valuation of immovable properties. The AO had referred the properties for valuation to the Valuation Officer due to discrepancies in the acquisition figures. The assessee had filed objections, but the AO still made additions to the income. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, and the Tribunal allowed the appeals for certain assessment years. The revenue contended that the ITAT erred in law in deleting the addition based on valuation, especially since the assessee had not filed the return of income for a significant period after statutory notices. The High Court noted previous dismissals of similar appeals, holding that the findings were questions of fact, and no substantial question of law arose, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.Issue 2: Competence of registered valuer in determining property valueAnother substantial question of law raised in the appeal was whether the ITAT was justified in not accepting the valuation made by the registered valuer, who are considered competent authorities for such purposes. The revenue argued that the registered valuer had based the valuation on approved rates of competent authorities and followed due procedure by providing opportunities for submissions and evidence. The High Court did not delve into this issue specifically in the judgment provided, as the appeal was dismissed based on the lack of substantial questions of law arising from the case.Issue 3: Compliance with due procedure of law in property valuationThe third substantial question of law raised was whether the ITAT was justified in not accepting the valuation made by the registered valuer, who had followed due procedure by considering all submissions and evidence provided by the assessee during the valuation of immovable properties. However, the High Court did not provide a detailed analysis of this issue in the judgment excerpt provided, as the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of no substantial question of law arising from the case.In conclusion, the High Court's judgment dismissed the revenue's appeal concerning the valuation of immovable properties for income tax assessment, as it found no substantial question of law based on previous dismissals of similar appeals. The issues regarding the competence of the registered valuer and compliance with due procedure in property valuation were raised but not extensively discussed in the judgment excerpt.