TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the development agreements executed in the assessment year 2008-09 amounted to a transfer of the capital asset under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, so as to attract capital gains tax in that year. (ii) Whether, if no transfer occurred in the year under consideration, the resulting capital gains could be taxed in the later years in which the land was actually conveyed.
Issue (i): Whether the development agreements executed in the assessment year 2008-09 amounted to a transfer of the capital asset under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, so as to attract capital gains tax in that year.
Analysis: The agreements gave the developer only a licence to enter the property and not possession as owner. At the relevant time, part of the land stood recorded in the name of the Government of Maharashtra under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, and the title itself was under dispute. On those facts, the essential ingredient for invoking section 53A, namely allowing possession in part performance of a contract, was absent. The transaction therefore did not mature into a transfer in the relevant assessment year. The conclusion is consistent with the principle that a capital gain cannot be brought to tax on a transaction that never materialised as a transfer.
Conclusion: No transfer took place in the assessment year 2008-09 and the capital gains additions were not sustainable in that year.
Issue (ii): Whether, if no transfer occurred in the year under consideration, the resulting capital gains could be taxed in the later years in which the land was actually conveyed.
Analysis: The later registered sale of 80R land to a third party in 2010 and the subsequent conveyance of the remaining land in 2013 showed that the transaction ultimately fructified only in later years. The Court treated the 2010 transfer as a taxable transfer to that extent in the relevant later year and the balance transfer as taxable in the year of the 2013 conveyance, with appropriate adjustment of amounts received earlier under the aborted development arrangements. The analysis proceeded on the basis that taxability follows the actual transfer when it occurs.
Conclusion: The capital gains, if any, were chargeable in the later years when the transfers actually took place, not in the assessment year 2008-09.
Final Conclusion: The Revenue's addition for the assessment year 2008-09 failed because the development agreements did not constitute a completed transfer in that year; taxation, if otherwise exigible, was to be examined in the later assessment years corresponding to the actual conveyances.
Ratio Decidendi: A development agreement does not attract capital gains tax under section 2(47)(v) unless possession is given in part performance of the contract under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882; where the developer receives only a licence and the transfer of title or effective possession never materialises, no taxable transfer arises in that year.
TaxTMI 
