Late Smt. Saraswathi Srinivasan, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2254/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7962 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R SIVARAMAN SHRI GURU BA
• Keywords: Fair market value; Valuation report

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , . !' , # $ % [ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.2254/MDS/2013 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 LATE SMT. SARASWATHI SRINIVASAN REP. BY SMT. H. MANGALAGOURI(LEGAL HEIR) NO.3A, BLOCK A, RAMANIYAM EDEN 46/1, VELACHERY MAIN ROAD VELACHERRY, CHENNAI 600 042 VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER BUSINESS WARD V(1) CHENNAI [PAN AAPPS 7388 L] ( &' / APPELLANT) ( ()&' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. SIVARAMAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GURU BASHYAM, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 20 - 01 - 2016 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 - 0 2 - 2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V, CHENNA I, DATED 2.9.2013 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION OF ESTIMATI ON OF FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1981. ITA NO. 2254/13 :- 2 -: 3. SHRI R.SIVARAMAN, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1981 FOR COMPUTING THE CAPITAL GAINS AT ` 5 LAKHS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1 981 AT ` 33,755/- BY TAKING THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. ACCORD ING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS ONL Y TO GUIDE THE SUB- REGISTRAR TO FIND OUT THE MARKET VALUE. THE GUIDEL INE VALUE WILL NOT REPRESENT THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. THEREF ORE, ESTIMATING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1981 AT ` 33,755/- BY ADOPTING THE GUIDELINE VALUE IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE ASSESSEE TO OBJECT TO THE VALUATION REPORT FILED BY THE DEPA RTMENTAL VALUATION OFFICER. THE DVO HAS ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF VALUATION. THEREFORE, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. WE HEARD SHRI GURU BASHYAM, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. 5. HAVING HEARD THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND T HE LD. DR, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THA T THE MARKET VALUE IS NOTHING BUT THE PRICE THAT MAY BE AGREED BETWEEN A WILLING PURCHASER AND A WILLING SELLER. THE MARKET VALUE IS NOT A CON STANT FIGURE. IT MAY ITA NO. 2254/13 :- 3 -: FLUCTUATE DEPENDING UPON VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES. TH E VALUE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD FLUCTUATE DEPENDING UPON THE LOCATIO N, AREA, SIZE, INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AVAILABLE AROUND THE AREA , POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, ACCESS TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIE S, ETC. THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF THE REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT IS ONLY TO GUI DE THE SUB-REGISTRAR TO FIND OUT THE MARKET VALUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COL LECTING STAMP DUTY. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT GUI DELINE VALUE WILL NOT ALWAYS REPRESENT THE MARKET VALUE. HOWEVER, THE GU IDELINE VALUE MAY BE ONE OF THE FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATIO N IN ADDITION TO THE FACTORS MENTIONED ABOVE. MOREOVER, THE DVO HAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE VALUING THE PROP ERTY. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RECONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AR E SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE OF DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1981 IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RECONSIDER THE ISSUE AFTER TAKING INT O CONSIDERATION ALL THE FACTORS MENTIONED ABOVE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE I SSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO T HE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO. 2254/13 :- 4 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH FEBRUARY, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ' ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED: 19 TH FEBRUARY, 2016 RD &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. + / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. ),- . / DR 3. +/' / CIT(A) 6. -01 / GF