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>ITAT Chennai: Assessing Officer to Use Rent Capitalization Method for Property Cost</h1> <h3>Smt. R. RosalinVasanthi Versus The Income Tax Officer, Salem.</h3> Smt. R. RosalinVasanthi Versus The Income Tax Officer, Salem. - [2020] 80 ITR (Trib) 525 (ITAT [Chen]) Issues: Assessment of capital gains based on valuation of property, determination of cost of acquisition, adoption of rent capitalization method for valuation.Analysis:1. Assessment of Capital Gains: The appeals were filed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax for the assessment year 2005-06. The Assessing Officer adopted a lower cost of acquisition for land and building, leading to a dispute. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, prompting the assessees to appeal further to the ITAT Chennai.2. Determination of Cost of Acquisition: The assessees claimed the cost of acquisition as per their calculation, while the AO relied on the sub-registrar's guideline value for land and the Valuation Officer's report for the building. The assessees argued that the guideline value did not represent the correct market value, and the Valuation Officer's report was flawed as the property had been demolished before inspection. The ITAT agreed with the assessees' contention and directed the AO to adopt a higher value for the cost of acquisition based on the rent capitalization method.3. Adoption of Rent Capitalization Method: The assessees presented evidence of rental income and advance rent received for the property. They argued that the value should be determined using the rent capitalization method as per the Wealth Tax Act. The ITAT found merit in this argument, considering the existence of the rental agreement and directed the AO to adopt a value of Rs. 10 lakhs for the land and building as on 01.04.1981, to compute the capital gains accordingly.4. Conclusion: The ITAT Chennai partially allowed the appeals, emphasizing the correct determination of the cost of acquisition based on the rent capitalization method. The decision highlighted the importance of considering actual market value and rental income in assessing capital gains.
TaxTMI 