Hyderabad: The proposal to revise the property tax assessment procedure, in the draft Core Urban Region Integrated Governance (CURE) Bill, 2026, has not gone down well with a large section of people. Data accessed by TOI found that the draft bill received more than 4,100 suggestions, comments and objections during the 20-day public consultation. Of these, more than 3,100 raised concerns with the proposed property tax reforms. Respondents argued that replacing the annual rental value (ARV) system with the capital value system (CVS) would impose an unfair financial burden on property owners by taxing assets based on market values rather than their actual rental income.Some submissions expressed concern with other provisions recommended in the draft — related to governance, administrative powers and oversight of civic works. The proposed CURE bill seeks to replace the seven-decade-old Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Act, 1955, with a new legal framework for the expanded metropolitan region. The property tax revision has been proposed under Sections 76 to 79 of the old Act.But many contended that capital values are often driven by speculation and do not reflect the owner’s real earning capacity, resulting in a sharp increase in tax liability. Among those who raised the issue was the Federation of Gated Communities Cyberabad, which represents residents across Hyderabad’s western corridor. The federation stated that a hike in property taxes based on capital value or market value fluctuations is completely unacceptable to the residents.“Severe discrepancies in the calculation of GHMC property tax have existed for two decades, where no equality is followed even among similar-storeyed buildings in the same colonies. Fix property tax for a defined assessment period (e.g., five years), with revisions allowed only for structural additions or changes in usage. The system must first address and rectify these long-standing calculation anomalies to ensure absolute fairness and predictability,” said Sai Ravi Shankar, president of the association. “All suggestions and objections received during the consultation process will be examined before finalising the legislation. Concerns raised by residents would be taken into consideration while preparing the final version of the bill,” said a senior official from MAUD.
