Rule 55 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026

Where this rule sits

Rule 55 gives effect to Section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 2025. A rule cannot go beyond the section it serves: where the two seem to differ, the section governs.

← Rule 54  ·  Rule 56 →

What this rule does

The rule fills in the two blanks in section 91(1)(b)(i). The percentage of the value of the asset shall be 15%, and the amount shall be ten lakh rupees.

Why it is there

Section 91(1)(b)(i) lets the Assessing Officer refer a valuation to a Valuation Officer where the difference between the claimed value and the fair market value crosses a prescribed percentage or a prescribed amount, but leaves both figures to be prescribed. This rule states them, and states nothing else — the trigger, the reference and the consequences all remain in the section.

Who it applies to

• An Assessing Officer deciding whether the conditions in section 91(1)(b)(i) are met before making a reference
• An assessee whose asset valuation is referred to a Valuation Officer
• A Valuation Officer receiving the reference

The figures, and what each one turns on

What this means in practice

The rule supplies numbers only. How the 15% and the ten lakh rupees interact — what they are measured against and whether either alone suffices — is settled by section 91(1)(b)(i) itself, and the rule cannot enlarge or narrow that. Because these are the conditions for making a reference, an objection that the reference was bad has to start with the section's own arithmetic applied to these two figures.

An example

An Assessing Officer forms the view that an asset shown at fifty lakh rupees is worth more. Whether he can refer the valuation under section 91(1)(b)(i) turns on the difference measured against the tests in that provision, using 15% as the percentage of the value of the asset and ten lakh rupees as the amount, both supplied by this rule.

Where you meet this rule

You meet it inside a reference to a Valuation Officer during assessment, usually only when the assessee disputes that the section 91(1)(b)(i) threshold was crossed at all.

The words themselves

What people get wrong

• Treating the rule as the power to refer. The power is in section 91(1)(b); the rule only supplies the percentage and the amount.
• Applying these figures to a reference made under some other limb of section 91(1). The rule is expressly for section 91(1)(b)(i).
• Reading 15% as a tolerance the assessee may claim. It is a condition for the officer's reference, stated by the section, not a margin of error in valuation.