…
The required valuation date
[March 1, 2010] is quite close to the appraisal as of April 19, 2010. While
that appraisal does not support the valuation claimed by the Petitioners, it
might support a valuation that is about $35,000 less than the disputed
assessment. Because the hearsay objection was made, however, that appraisal
alone is not a sufficient basis for lowering the assessment. And there is no
non-hearsay evidence in this record that supports a valuation of $353,000.
Consequently, no change can be ordered on that basis.
The actual purchase price of a
property often can be the best evidence of that property’s market value-in-use. The Petitioners
purchased the subject property for $376,000 on March 22, 2007. Nothing in the
record establishes how that price relates to value as of March 1, 2010.
Therefore, that point does not help to prove what the assessment should be.
The Petitioners offered
conclusory testimony that the subject property should be valued at $324,000.
They failed to present substantial evidence or explanation for how this amount
was reached. Even the appraisals the Petitioners offered contradict that
testimony. Furthermore, such conclusory statements are not probative evidence
and do not help to prove what the 2010 assessment should be. Whitley
Products, Inc. v. State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs, 704 N.E.2d 1113, 1119 (Ind. Tax
Ct. 1998).
http://www.in.gov/ibtr/files/Thiry_and_Barlage_15-020-10-1-5-00001.pdf
