Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the sum of Rs. 50,000 received in the form of two house-sites was to be treated as received by the assessee on 3rd April 1929 (date of remittance entry), 5th April 1929 (date of agreement/possession as argued), or 8th May 1929 (date of execution of the sale deed) for the purposes of assessment under Section 4(2) of the Income-tax Act.
Analysis: The question turns on when the profits were actually received in the shape of property for the year of accounting running from 13th April 1929 to 12th April 1930. The facts show payment on 3rd April 1929, a contract to sell on 5th April 1929 and execution of the sale deed on 8th May 1929. The point that possession may have been delivered before the sale deed was not raised before the original taxing officer and the appellate authority rightly declined to permit fresh evidence on that matter. Where a transaction comprises payment, contract and subsequent completion by deed, receipt in the shape of property is to be located at the time of completion of the transaction by execution of the sale deed, unless a prior event establishing receipt (such as completed transfer of possession accepted by the taxing authority on evidence) is proved and was properly raised in the proceedings.
Conclusion: The sum of Rs. 50,000 was received by the assessee on 8th May 1929, and is taxable in the accounting year containing that date; the assessee's contention that receipt occurred on 3rd April 1929 (or, alternatively, on 5th April 1929) is rejected.