TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t value as on 01/04/1981. The appellant sold his house admeasuring 2386.03 sq.yds. with a built up area for valuable consideration of ₹ 66000000/-. The fair market value as per sub registrar office of ₹ 85141350/ - was substituted as deemed sales consideration by virtue of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the sale of the above property the appellant adopted fair market value as on 01/04/1981 at ₹ 1600/- per sq. yd for land and ₹ 1520/- per sq. mt for built up area which was based upon the valuation report dated : 29th April, 2009 issued by the approved valuer Shri R.Muthu Krishnan. The assessing officer adopted the rates as per sub registrar office @Rs.20/ - per sq yds for land and @Rs 50/ -per sq ft for built up area by ignoring the valuation report filed before him. 3. On appeal, it was submitted before the CIT(A) that the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1) ignored the decisions of the jurisdictional benches of the Hon'ble Income Tax Tribunal, which have consistently held that the value mentioned in the basic value register of sub registrar cannot be treated as comparable values of market value. It was further submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as filed before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax. The order of the CIT has been confirmed by the ITAT. 6. It was also submitted that in its latest decision, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, in the case of Ashven Datla Vs ITO ward 12(1), Hyderabad copy of the order placed at page 66 to 73 of the paper book, upheld the rate at ₹ 750/- adopted by the appellant as against ₹ 8 indicated in the sub-registrar basic registers. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal considered the valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of the value adopted by assesee. The land in question in the said case is at Hydernagar village near Kukatpally. 7. It was further submitted that the land of the assessee is at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad and is very near from Taj Banjara the 2 star hotel existing even before 1981. The photograph of the building filed along with the written submissions indicates the prominence of the area even in the year 1981. The land is less than a km away from Punjagutta circle the central point and the commercial hub even in 1981. Finally, considering all these advantageous points the registered valuer in his report e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In view of the above observation of the Tribunal it is obvious that the State Government fixed the guideline value in the year 1976 and it was not revised till 1995. Moreover, as observed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, the guideline value/basic register was not prepared scientifically 12. The progressive valuation rates between the period 1981 and 1997 was well appreciated by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-VI in his order in the case of Wasif Hassan Latif (page 44 to 54 of the paper book). The basic value registered rate remained static from 1976 to 1984, and thereafter the rates were revised to actualities. It was submitted that this issue has been appreciated by the CIT(A-VI) in his order in the case of Sri Narendranath in ITA.No.587/01-02, wherein the increase in rates had been noted as under : Year Rate per Sq yard in rupees 1981 Rs.100 1984 Rs.1000 1987 Rs.1500 1994 Rs.4000 1997 Rs.10000 , 13. The assessee s A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... comparable cases of the area adjoining the assessee's property in support of his estimation and also failed to provide any evidence to show that the property could have fetched more value than the cost certified by the SRO and hence, adopted the SRO value following the decision of ITAT, Visakhapatnam in the case of M. Siva Parvathi vs. ITO [2010] 129 TIJeVisakha) 463, the facts of which case are similar to the present case. 3. The learned CIT(A) was not justified in adopting the cost of construction @ 100/- per Sq. ft as against the Sub-Registrar value of ₹ 50/- per Sq. ft on the estimate basis on the ground that the fair market value of the built-up area would not get much affected by the location of the property. 4. The Order of learned CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that the assessment order be restored . 16. The learned D.R. placed reliance in the case of 129 TTJ 463 and 252 ITR 581 (A.P.). We find that the case laws referred by D.R. to be inapplicable to the facts of the case. 17. The learned Counsel for the assessee Shri K.C.Devadas vehemently argued reiterating the submissions made before the lower authorities. 18. We have heard both t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of land in the Safdarjung Enclave Area. Both the assessee and revenue are aggrieved with the findings of the learned CIT(A). The learned AR fairly admitted that there was no basis for increasing the average auction rates prevailing in Safdarjung Enclave 66 percent while the learned DR vehemently argued that report of registered valuer being without any basis nor having considered comparative instances of cost of land as on 1.4.1981 in Defence Colony or adjoining areas, could not be relied upon. In the light of these submissions on behalf of both the parties, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, especially when the report of registered valuer does not disclose the basis for choosing average land auction rates in Safdarjung Enclave Area nor the basis of increase of such rates by 66 percent and nor even any reasons for not identifying comparative instances of cost of similarly situate properties in Defence Colony area while the impugned order does not disclose the basis of increase by 40 percent over the average auction rates in Safdarjung Enclave Area, not much reliance can be placed on the valuation report prepared by the registered valuer and partly r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
