Guideline value is yardstick at registration offices : Dinakar

By A. Subramani

CHENNAI, OCT. 10. Guideline value of property is a yardstick maintained at registration offices for calculating the stamp duty. Significant only for department purposes, guideline value becomes the market value when it comes to the sale document, remarked Mr. Justice N. Dinakar, hearing the `Jaya Publications appeals case' in the Madras High Court, today.

At the outset, on the seventh day of arguments, the judge made it known to both prosecution and defence that the Sub- Registrar was the ultimate authority so far as registration of sale documents was concerned.

There was no legal bar on the Sub-Registrar registering a transaction if he did not have any suspicion over property valuation, he said. Only in the event of doubt over the declared sale value would he be expected to refer the documents to his higher authorities. ``All that he considers is whether the transaction is fair. If he is not in any doubt, he can very well register it immediately.''

At this point, the specially-appointed prosecutor, Mr. K.V. Venkatapathi, pointed out that the guideline value would be fixed only by a committee consisting of the Inspector-General and the Deputy Inspector-General of Registration.

Mr. Mani Shankar, counsel for the sixth accused, Mr. Nagarajan, former Special Deputy Collector (stamps), cited that the Income Tax Department did not find any undervaluation and even issued a no-objection certificate (NOC). But the Judge said ``the NOC is issued on the subjective satisfaction of the income tax official concerned''. Mr. Justice Dinakar also said, ``I am not enamoured of this argument (about the NOC). Several such issues come to court after the officials come to know about the details of the transaction.'' Assuming that Mr. Nagarajan had cleared a transaction despite undervaluation, the TANSI case was not an exclusive and isolated one as he was consistently applying the same yardstick to all such sale under his jurisdiction, counsel argued.

This prompted the judge to say, ``he is saying that I (Mr. Nagarajan) am an incompetent fellow. I have committed a mistake. But, because I have been consistent on that count, do not convict me for incompetence.''

Tomorrow, counsel for Mr. T.R. Srinivasan, who was Chairman and Managing Director of the TANSI between August 1, 1991 and July 10, 1992, will commence his arguments. With his submissions, arguments in the `Jaya Publications appeals case' will come to an end, and the `Sasi Enterprises appeals case' proceedings follow immediately.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Karunanidhi doesn't see any sympathy wave
Next     : No prosecution reply yet to Jayalalithaa plea