9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 5 cents of land cannot be taken as a comparable case for estimating the fair market value of the subject matter of land. Therefore, the lower authorities may not be justified in taking the value of the land at ₹ 3,000 per cent. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside, and the assessing officer is directed to take ₹ 45,000 per cent as fair market value as on 01-04-1981. - Decided in favour of assessee. Valuation of the building - though the assessee claims the value of the old house at ₹ 12,54,327 the assessing officer restricted the same at ₹ 7 lakhs - Held that:- The assessee claims that the old house was nalukettu with teakwood and rose wood and it was well maintained by renovation from time to time. There is no reference about this house in the valuation report. There is no other material available on record to suggest that the house was built with teak wood and rose wood. In the absence of any material, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessing officer has rightly estimated the value at ₹ 7 lakhs. In respect of the other house, the assessee claims value at ₹ 16 lakhs. However, the assessing off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purpose of estimating the fair market value as on 01-04-1981 at ₹ 3,000 per cent. The ld.representative further submitted that the cost of improvement claimed on the old residential house is not considered by both the authorities below. According to the ld.representative, in the assessment year 2001-02, the assessee has invested more than ₹ 10 lakhs and in the assessment year 2002-03 the assessee has invested about ₹ 7 lakhs. Similarly in the assessment year 2003-04 the assessee has invested ₹ 6,62,000. 4. The ld.representative further submitted that the residential house is nalukettu type building with teakwood and rose wood. The said house was renovated from time to time. The assessee has also explained the source for making the investment for improvement and renovation. The assessee has constructed second floor in the building by using the amount received from Southern Investments Pvt Ltd to the extent of ₹ 15 lakhs. Therefore, according to the ld.representative, the assessee has rightly estimated the fair market value of the building at ₹ 15 lakhs. According to the ld.representative, the document referred by the assessing officer fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, according to the ld.representative, the five cents of land compared by the assessing officer cannot be compared with subject matter of the land. The assessee claimed the cost of improvement to the extent of ₹ 29,44,114. The ld.representtive further submitted that the assessee estimated the value of the house at 12,54,327. The building was a nalukettu type of house with teakwood and rood wood. The house is well maintained by renovating the same from time to time. The assessing officer, however, estimated the same at ₹ 7 lakhs instead of ₹ 12,54,327. According to the ld.representative, the assessing officer ought to have accepted the valuation made by the assessee. In respect of another house the assessing officer taken the value of the house at ₹ 15 lakhs instead of ₹ 16 lakhs. According to the ld.representative, the assessing officer ought to have accepted the value at ₹ 16 lakhs. The ld.representative submitted that the assessee has rightly estimated the value at ₹ 45,000 per cent by considering the locality, infrastructure facility available near to the land. Therefore, both the authorities below are not correct in rejecting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the purchaser and the seller. The market price may depend upon various factors such as area of the land, location of the land, access to the land and infrastructure facilities around the area, proximity to the infrastructure, potential for future development etc. In this case, it is not in dispute that the subject land of 75.046 cents of land was situated few metres away from the bypass road which is part of NH 47 in Trikkakara panchayat. The comparable land of 5 cents is situated about 2 kms away from the subject matter of land. From the remand report filed by the assessing officer before the CIT(A) it appears, both the lands are at Palliprom, vazhakkala village, Thrikkakara panchayat. The assessing officer has not disputed the claim of the assessee that the comparable 5 cents of land is 2 kms away from the bypass road. Merely because both the lands are situated at Palliprom, Vazhakala village, Trikkara panchayat it does not mean that both the lands will have the same value. The land which is nearer to the bypass road which is part of NH 47 would fetch more value than the land which is 2 kms away from the bypass road. Therefore, merely because both the lands fall within the Pall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proved valuer who is competent to value the land and buildings claims that taking 10% of the sale consideration backwards year after year is one of the approved methods, the same cannot be rejected unless and until the assessing officer refers the matter to the DVO if at all he has any doubt. In this case, the assessing officer has not referred the matter to the DVO. In the absence of any valuation made by the DVO, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessing officer is not justified in saying that there is no practice of taking 10% of the sale consideration backwards yer after year for the purpose of valuation. 11. Now coming to the valuation of the land, the land is admittedly situated few metres away from the bypass road which is part of NH 47. It is also an admitted fact that NH 47 and bypass road was formed even in the year 1981. The subject matter of land has proximity to the national highway. It has potential for future development because of its location. The land was sold for construction of a multi-storey building consisting of 80 apartments. By taking into consideration all these factors, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the land would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
