Shri L. Uthayakumar,Chennai vs Ito, Ward-4(4), Chennai on 14 August, 2025
7. We note that admittedly, the Government of Tamil Nadu made
downward revision in the guideline value from 2017 and the competitive
details are placed on record by the assessee. We find that the assessee
purchased the property on 17.05.2017 admeasuring 3600 sq. ft. @ rate of
₹.2200 per sq.ft., whereas, approximately within 25 days, the Government
of Tamil Nadu made downward revision of guideline value of ₹.1474 per
sq. ft. as against ₹.2200 per sq. ft. w.e.f. 09.06.2017. Under such
scenario on an identical issue, in the case of Smt. Sugirda Dinakar v. ITO
(supra), we find that the Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of the
Assessing Officer with a direction to refer the matter again to the DVO
with specific direction to consider the downward revision of guideline
value made form 2017 of the relevant area and then estimate the fair
5 I.T.A. No.1288/Chny/25
market value of the property accordingly. Thus, we set aside the orders of
authorities below and remand the matter to the file of the Assessing
Officer for fresh consideration keeping in view of the order of this Tribunal
referred herein above. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are
allowed for statistical purposes.