The NSW Land and Environment Court has held that the land value at each base date for each of 2 properties in question was the value agreed between the valuers including GST.
The taxpayer owned 2 commercial properties in Sydney and its objections to land valuations on each property were dismissed, so it appealed to the Land and Environment Court. While the Valuer-General accepted that the land values determined in respect of each property and for each of the base dates were too high and that the appeals filed by the taxpayer should be allowed, the parties however disagreed on whether the land value should include GST – the taxpayer company said it should not, while the Valuer-General considered land value should include GST.
The company contended that a GST component, if any, of the price received from a property transaction should be removed in order to determine or provide evidence of the “value” of the land sold. The company argued that the sum “realised” was the net amount received by the vendor.
The Court did not accept the company’s submission. It considered that the phrase “to realise”, when read in context of the statutory expression found in s 6A(1), should not be given the restricted meaning which the company attributed to it. The Court’s view was that the land value was the “amount expected to be received on the sale of that land, including any GST which the vendor may be liable to pay”.
In the result, the Court determined that the land value at each base date and for each of the 2 properties in question was the value agreed between the valuers, but including GST.
(Storage Equities Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2013] NSWLEC 137, Land and Environment Court of NSW, Craig J, 22 August 2013)
[LTN 175, 10/9/13]