9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1289X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the guideline value of Sub-Registrar is one of the factors to be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the fair market value as on 01.04.1981. Moreover, the location of the property, infrastructure facilities available around the property, public access to the property, distance between the bus stand, railway station, airport from the property, potential for future development, proximity to the schools, colleges and other public institutions, etc. are needed to be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the fair market value. In the case before us, the property is admittedly located at Sarangapani Street, T. Nagar, which is one of the prime areas in the city of Chennai and there are several infrastr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y issue arises for consideration is determination fair market value as on 01.04.1981. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee purchased a house property at Door No.47, Sarangapani Street, T. Nagar, Chennai, for a total consideration of ₹ 1,67,000/- on 23.01.1976. While computing the capital gain, the assessee computed the index cost of acquisition at ₹ 1,20,03,750/- by adopting the fair market value of the land and building as on 01.04.1981 at ₹ 20,62,500/-. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee was placing reliance on the construction agreement said to be entered into with Shri Gopal Achari on 23.02.1983. The Assessing Officer found that the guideline value of the property as on 01.04.1981 at Sarangapani Street, T. Naga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry limited as compared to the value adopted by the assessee. According to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer has also found that the assessee has not valued the building separately. The assessee also did not accept the value of land and building. However, according to the Ld. D.R., the assessee adopted the market value at ₹ 7,50,000/- per ground as on 01.04.1981. The CIT(Appeals), however, found that the remains of the building when demolished would have fetched ₹ 15 lakhs in the year 1982 and the assessee has adopted only 46% of ₹ 15 lakhs and this was reasonable. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the CIT(Appeals) accepted the fair market value adopted by the assessee as on 01.04.1981. According to the Ld. D.R., the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hed ₹ 15 lakhs in the year 1982. When the remains of the building would have fetched ₹ 15 lakhs, the Assessing Officer, should take entire ₹ 15 lakhs as market value. In fact, according to the Ld. counsel, the assessee is claiming 46% of ₹ 15 lakhs, which was found to be reasonable. The value of the building has to be determined on the basis of market value and not after reducing the depreciation. According to the Ld. counsel, what is required to determine is market value as on 01.04.1981 and not the book value. 7. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The only issue arises for consideration is estimation of fair market value as on 01.04.1981 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich is one of the prime areas in the city of Chennai and there are several infrastructure facilities such as railway station, bus stand, market around the locality. There are schools, institutions and business establishments are available around the locality. While taking into consideration all the facilities available in the locality, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly found that the fair market value estimated by the assessee as on 01.04.1981 is reasonable and acceptable one. This Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. 8. Now coming to the value of the building, if the property was demolished as on 01.04.1981, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
