9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hatram Road, 7th Division, behind Raja Hussain Dargah, Upparpet, Balepet Cross, Bangalore-2, on 8th October 1964 for a consideration of Rs.25,000/-. She sold the said property on 4.11.2000 for a consideration of Rs.27,55,000/-. For the purpose of computation of the capital gain, the assessee took the value of the property as on 1.4.1981 at Rs.2,75,000/-. The Assessing Authority required the assessee to file the valuation report of the property as on 1.4.1981. Instead of furnishing such report, the assessee filed the computation sheets of net wealth as on 31.3.1992, showing that the value of the property is Rs.2,25,000/- as on 31.3.1992 for the purpose of wealth tax. As the assessee failed to produce any valuation report and also to substant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee is in appeal. 3. On 14.8.2007, the appeal came to be admitted to consider the substantial question of law framed on that day. The learned Counsels for the parties submit, in the light of the aforesaid facts and the orders passed, the substantial question of law framed already, may not be proper and therefore, they requested the court to re-frame the substantial question of law. Accordingly, the substantial question of law is re-framed as under: "Whether the authorities were justified in relying on either the guideline value for the purpose of stamp duty and registration charges, or the value adopted under the Wealth Tax Act, for determining the fair market value under the Income Tax Act, 1961?" 4. The "fair market ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealth on which the wealth tax was payable. The Wealth Tax Act provides a mechanism, under which the property is valued and net wealth determined for the purpose of payment of wealth tax. It is not a fair market value. Therefore, in determining the fair market value under the Act, neither the guideline value prescribed for the purpose of stamp duty and registration under the Karnataka Stamp Act and the Indian Registration Act nor the net wealth value arrived at under the provisions of the Wealth Tax Act, cannot be the guiding factor. The market value of the property is certainly far more than the guideline value. Similarly, the value of the property, which is the subject matter of wealth tax, is also far more than the value for which it is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed for Rs.25,000/- in 1964 and that property was sold for Rs.27,55,000/- in 2000, either adopting a procedure for escalation or re-escalation, the fair market value of the property would be around Rs.2,75,000/- as put forth by the assessee. 8. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the authorities committed a serious error in relying on an inadmissible evidence and in not taking into consideration the undisputed facts as well as the memo of calculation filed by the assessee, which is more proper. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is required to be set aside. Hence, we make the following order: The appeal is allowed. All the impugned orders are hereby set aside. The substantial question of law is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
