9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (6) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Valuation Officer and the Valuation Officer after giving opportunity to submit objections to the assessee, fixed the valuation of the property on the basis of land and building method, which was objected to by the assessee. The assessees filed appeals against the said valuation and the Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order confirmed the orders passed by the Assessing Officer. 2. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the assessees are not disputing the valuation of the land as fixed by the Valuation Officer. The valuation of the building only is the subject matter of dispute, which is having eight floors. The main objection on behalf of the assessee before us is that while valuing the property the valuation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting Government offices. According to the learned counsel for the assessee while fixing the rents the valuation of the building was done following the PWD rates and a chart showing the valuation was also filed alongwith the paperbook which shows that the plinth area rate for buildings for the year 1985-86 is Rs. 750 for ground floor (RCC) and Rs. 680 for first and second floors. For the year 1988-89 the plinth area rate for ground floor is Rs. 866 and for first and second floors it is Rs. 788. It was submitted on behalf of the assessee that for preparation of the chart quoted above the assessee had adopted the rate from the aforesaid schedule of plinth area rates considered in the proceedings of the Superintending Engineer, PWD, Coimbatore. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und floor was Rs. 1,510 and first floor was Rs. 1,365. For the next year, i.e., for 1988-89 the rate of ground floor for mofussil area was Rs. 1,570 and for first floor was Rs. 1,420. On behalf of the department it was submitted that this was the State PWD rate prevailing during the assessment years in question. 4. We have heard the parties. The main contention on behalf of the assessee is that for the purpose of estimating the valuation of the properties the Valuation Officer ought to have followed the State PWD rates instead of Central PWD rates. In support of this contention the assessee has submitted a comparative chart showing the State PWD rates, which was adopted in the proceedings by the Superintending Engineer, PWD, Coimbatore fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on on behalf of the assessee. Nowhere in the Act or in the Rules it has been prescribed that only the CPWD rates are to be followed for the purpose of arriving at the valuation of the properties. On the other hand the local PWD rates which are based on the local conditions differ from one State to another. It is also true that for the purpose of construction of a building the same cost cannot be incurred if one building is constructed in a metropolitan city like Bombay and the other building is constructed in a mofussil area. Therefore, if the Valuation Officer adopts the State PWD rate, which is a recognised rate by the State Government, for the purpose of valuing the property, it cannot be said to be erroneous. Now the question is that bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
