Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2003 (2) TMI 62 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Taxpayer appeal allowed: contract date (18 Aug 1994) is transfer date under section 2(47)(v), not possession date HC allowed the taxpayer's appeal, holding that the relevant date for transfer under section 2(47)(v) is the contract date (18 Aug 1994) where the contract ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Taxpayer appeal allowed: contract date (18 Aug 1994) is transfer date under section 2(47)(v), not possession date

                            HC allowed the taxpayer's appeal, holding that the relevant date for transfer under section 2(47)(v) is the contract date (18 Aug 1994) where the contract as a whole conveys control to the developer, not the date of actual possession or licence. The court found the Tribunal's factual findings and reliance on certain permissions erroneous or unsupported, noted mistakes on record, and directed taking the assessee's document compilation on file. The HC laid down principles for future cases and allowed the appeal.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in concluding that the appellant had transferred the property situated at Gamdevi during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1996-97.
                            2. Whether the Tribunal's conclusion that the appellant had transferred the property during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1996-97 was unreasonable.
                            3. Whether the Tribunal's conclusion was arrived at by considering irrelevant circumstances and without appreciating and considering the relevant factual material, thereby vitiating the decision.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            Issue 1: Justification of Tribunal's Conclusion on Transfer of Property
                            The primary issue revolves around whether the transfer of property at Gamdevi occurred during the assessment year 1996-97 or 1999-2000. The Department argued that the transfer took place during the financial year ending March 31, 1996, based on substantial payments and permissions obtained. The assessee contended that the transfer occurred only when an irrevocable license was granted in favor of Floreat, which happened during the financial year ending March 31, 1999. The court examined the development agreement dated August 18, 1994, and the various permissions obtained by Floreat. The court concluded that the relevant date for determining the transfer under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act is the date of the contract, which was August 18, 1994, and not the date of substantial compliance or possession.

                            Issue 2: Reasonableness of Tribunal's Conclusion
                            The court found the Tribunal's reliance on substantial compliance of the contract to be erroneous. The Tribunal had inferred possession based on permissions obtained and payments made during the financial year ending March 31, 1996. However, the court emphasized that the year of chargeability for capital gains tax should be the year in which the development agreement was executed, as per section 2(47)(v). The court noted that the Tribunal's conclusion was based on incorrect dates and misinterpretations of the agreement's terms, leading to an unreasonable conclusion.

                            Issue 3: Consideration of Irrelevant Circumstances
                            The court identified several errors in the Tribunal's findings, such as incorrect dates and non-existent permissions. The Tribunal had referred to permissions obtained during financial years other than the one ending March 31, 1996, and had made errors in interpreting the dates of possession and compliance. The court highlighted these mistakes, stating that the Tribunal's decision was vitiated by considering irrelevant circumstances and failing to appreciate the relevant factual material. The court also pointed out that the Tribunal had misinterpreted the financial year dates, leading to an incorrect conclusion about the year of transfer.

                            Conclusion:
                            The court allowed the appeal of the assessee, answering the first question in the negative, i.e., in favor of the assessee and against the Department. Consequently, it was unnecessary to answer the second question. The third question was answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favor of the assessee and against the Department. The court emphasized the importance of interpreting development agreements in light of section 2(47)(v) and concluded that the transfer should be considered to have occurred in the year the agreement was executed, not based on substantial compliance or possession. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found