9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Appeal against order of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal setting aside acquisition of property under Chap. XX-A of the I.T. Act, 1961. - Determination of fair market value of property for acquisition under Chap. XX-A of the Act. - Competency of High Court to entertain appeal under s. 269H of the Act on questions of law only. Analysis: The Commissioner of Income-tax filed an appeal under s. 269H of the I.T. Act, 1961, challenging the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, which set aside the acquisition of a property under Chap. XX-A of the Act. The property in question, House No. 117-N/73 Kakadeo, Kanpur, was transferred from Smt. Kamini Devi to Sri Prem Narain Tandon for Rs. 49,500. The Competent Authority initiated proceedings based on suspicion of undervaluation, leading to objections from both the transferor and transferee. The Competent Authority determined the fair market value at Rs. 77,700, exceeding the apparent consideration by more than 15%. However, the Tribunal disagreed, holding that the apparent consideration reflected the fair market value, thus setting aside the acquisition order. The High Court highlighted the limited scope of appeal under s. 269H, allowing appeals only on questions of law. The Tribunal's assessment, considering the official valuer's report and annual rental value, was deemed a factual determination. Citing precedent, the Court emphasized that questions of market value and depreciation are factual, not legal issues. As no legal question arose in the appeal, the Court found no grounds for intervention. Regarding the valuation of the property, the Tribunal rejected the addition of 65% for Kanpur Index by the official valuer, deeming it unjustified. The absence of the valuation officer during Tribunal proceedings allowed the Tribunal to independently assess the property's value. The Court upheld this decision, stressing the Competent Authority's duty to present all relevant material for fair adjudication. The Tribunal's method of determining property value based on annual rental income was upheld by the Court. By considering the rental income and applying a multiple to determine market value, the Tribunal's approach was deemed appropriate. The Court endorsed this method, noting its recognition in legislative rules for property valuation. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing its jurisdiction in setting aside the acquisition order based on factual assessments. While finding no legal errors, the Court dismissed the appeal, reiterating the limited scope of High Court appeals under s. 269H to questions of law only.
|
