TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Granted: Fair Market Value Set at Rs. 3,50,000. Expert Opinions Emphasized.</h1> <h3>Mr. Mohan Alagappan Versus Income Tax Officer, Chennai</h3> Mr. Mohan Alagappan Versus Income Tax Officer, Chennai - [2019] 69 ITR (Trib) 1 (ITAT [Chen]) Issues Involved:1. Whether the guideline value maintained by Registration Authorities can be the basis for determining the market value for acquisition purposes.2. Validity of the valuation method adopted by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).3. Consideration of expert opinions and comparable sale instances in determining the market value of the property as on 01.04.1981.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Guideline Value as Basis for Market Value Determination:The assessee contended that the guideline value maintained by Registration Authorities for checking stamp duty evasion cannot be the basis for determining the market value for acquisition. This argument was supported by various judicial precedents, including decisions from the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, which held that guideline values are limited to stamp duty purposes and do not reflect the true market value for acquisition. The Tribunal considered these precedents and agreed that guideline values alone are not a reliable basis for determining market value under acquisition proceedings.2. Validity of Valuation Method Adopted by Assessing Officer and CIT(A):The Assessing Officer had relied on the Sub-Registrar's opinion, which valued the property at Rs. 50,000 per ground as on 01.04.1981, while the assessee claimed a value of Rs. 5,00,000 per ground. The CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's valuation. The Tribunal noted that the valuation should consider multiple factors, including expert opinions and comparable sale instances, rather than relying solely on guideline values or the Sub-Registrar's opinion.3. Expert Opinions and Comparable Sale Instances:The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's guidelines in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer v. T. Adinarayan Setty, which outlined methods for determining market value, including expert opinions, comparable sale instances, and potential profits. The Tribunal also considered the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT Vs. J.Chelladurai, which suggested averaging the values provided by the assessee and the assessing officer when there is a significant discrepancy.In light of these principles, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to adopt a balanced approach by averaging the values suggested by both parties. Consequently, the Tribunal determined the fair market value of the property as on 01.04.1981 to be Rs. 3,50,000 per ground, which was a compromise between the assessee's claim of Rs. 5,00,000 and the Assessing Officer's valuation of Rs. 50,000.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the fair market value of Rs. 3,50,000 per ground as on 01.04.1981. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering multiple factors and expert opinions in determining the market value for acquisition purposes, rather than relying solely on guideline values.
TaxTMI 