Value adopted by assessee cannot be substituted by A.O. merely on the basis of general inquiries

When the value declared by the assessee as on 01.04.1981 is supported by valuation report of a registered valuer and the A.O. has taken different valuation without obtaining valuation report from the DVO, such value taken by the registered valuer cannot be substituted by the A.O. merely on the basis of general inquiries without obtaining a report from DVO.

Similarly, in the case of Pramila M Desai (supra) also, it is held by the tribunal that the report of the registered valuer being a technical person, cannot be substituted without obtaining DVO’ s report or any other report of a technical person. Hence, this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these two Tribunal decisions. Moreover, we find that while adopting the value as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs.250/- per sq. yard as against Rs.800/- per sq. yard as adopted by the registered valuer, the basis of the A.O. was this much only that as per this report of the registered valuer, various sales instances considered by him which are for smaller plots but for a larger plot like that of the assessee, the value will be much less per sq. yard. Copy of the valuation report is available on page 108-111 of the paper book. On page 111 of the paper book, the registered valuer has given various sale instances during the period form 25.03.1980 to 30.08.1982 and the lowest value as per these sales instances is Rs.211.57 per sq. yard and the highest value as per these sales instances is Rs.97 1.73 per sq. yard as per the instance noted at Sl. 6, the rate is Rs.971.73 only. Sl. No.7 it is Rs.700/-, Sl. No.8 it is Rs.773.41 and as per Sl. No.9, it is Rs.800/- per sq. yard. The stand of the A.O. that the value of larger plot has to be lesser is without any basis and it depends on many factors. In some cases, the A.O. may be right that the price of a larger plot will be lesser but in other cases, it may be different and it may be found that price of larger plot is higher and, therefore, no decision can be taken on the basis of these presumptions. Apart form this that the area of the land is smaller in the sales instances noted by registered valuer, no defect has been pointed out by the A.O. in the valuation report of the registered valuer and we have already seen that this objection of the A.O. is without any basis and the correct position may be different than what is stated by the A.O. In the absence of any valid basis adopted by the A.O. to substitute the rate adopted by the assessee on the basis of a valuation report of a registered valuer, we feel that no interference is called for in the order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue also. This ground of the revenue is also rejected.

ITAT “D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before Shri A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
and Shri KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.(SS) No. 137 / Ahd/2009 – (Assessment year 2007-08)

 ACIT Vs. Smt. Hiraben Govindbhai Patel

C.O. No. 282/Ahd/2009 in IT(SS) No. 137/Ahd/2009
(Assessment year 2007-08)

Smt. Hiraben Govindbhai Patel Vs. ACIT, CC-2(4),

 Date of hearing: 07.03.2013

Date of pronouncement :    17.05.2013

O R D E R