Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: valuation guidelines in M/S R.V.Refractories vs District Revenue Officer(Stamps) on 19 November, 2008Matching Fragments
"The valuation guidelines prepared by the Revenue Officials at the instance of the Board of Revenue were a vowedly intended merely to assist the Sub-Registrars to find out, prima facie, whether the market value set out in the instruments had been set forth correctly. The guidelines were not intended as a substitute for market value or to foreclose the inquiry by the Collector which he is under a duty to make under Sec.47-A. The valuation guidelines were not prepared on the basis of any open hearing of the parties concerned or of any documents. They were based on date gathered broadly with reference to classification of lands, grouping of lands and the like. This being so, the Collector acting under Section 47-A cannot regard the valuation guidelines as the last word on subject market value. To do so would be to surrender his statutory obligation to determine market value on the basis of evidence which is a judicial or a quasi judicial function which he has to perform"
13. In R.Sai Bharathi vs. - J.Jayalalitha and others reported in 2003-4 L.W. 825, the relevance of guideline value was discussed and held as follows:-
"23. The guideline value has relevance only in the context of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act (as amended by TN Act 24 of 1967) which provides for dealing with instruments of conveyance which are undervalued. The guideline value is a rate fixed by authorities under the Stamp Act for purposes of determining the true market value of the property disclosed in an instrument requiring payment of stamp duty. Thus the guideline value fixed is not final but only a prima facie rate prevailing in an area. It is open to the registering authority as well as the person seeking registration to prove the actual market value of property. The authorities cannot regard the guideline valuation as the last word on the subject of market value. This position is made clear in the explanation to Rule 3 of Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments Rules. The said Explanation reads as follows: