<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (8) TMI 48 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775861</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi held that the AO erred in determining the fair market value (FMV) of the land without referring the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) as mandated by the Act. The valuation report by the registered valuer, prepared after technical analysis and inspection, carried rebuttable evidentiary value and could not be disregarded on mere assumptions or without factual contradictions. The AO&#039;s reliance on circle rates and Land &amp;amp; Development Office conversion rates for valuation was unsustainable. The DRP&#039;s direction to apply conversion rates for cost of acquisition was also overturned. The tribunal emphasized that conversion rates are not a suitable benchmark for FMV of mixed-use properties and upheld precedents requiring acceptance of expert valuer reports unless disproved. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, restoring reliance on the registered valuer&#039;s report and directing reference to the DVO for valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 08:15:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=840067" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 48 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775861</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi held that the AO erred in determining the fair market value (FMV) of the land without referring the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) as mandated by the Act. The valuation report by the registered valuer, prepared after technical analysis and inspection, carried rebuttable evidentiary value and could not be disregarded on mere assumptions or without factual contradictions. The AO&#039;s reliance on circle rates and Land &amp;amp; Development Office conversion rates for valuation was unsustainable. The DRP&#039;s direction to apply conversion rates for cost of acquisition was also overturned. The tribunal emphasized that conversion rates are not a suitable benchmark for FMV of mixed-use properties and upheld precedents requiring acceptance of expert valuer reports unless disproved. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, restoring reliance on the registered valuer&#039;s report and directing reference to the DVO for valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>