Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Surplus arising after termination of a development arrangement...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains computation
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Surplus arising after termination of a development arrangement and transfer of consolidated property rights is distinguished from compensation for destruction of a profit-making apparatus. Where contractual restraints prolonged the commercial sterilisation of rights, termination restored pre-existing rights and acquisition of reversionary rights completed a transferable bundle; on these facts, the surplus was treated as taxable capital gains rather than a non-taxable capital receipt or business income. A business-income disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was considered inapplicable to capital-gains computation. Expenditure or liability directly connected with removing encroachments and resolving boundary disputes may be allowable when genuinely incurred and sufficiently crystallised, subject to verification of documents, quantum, and nexus with the transfer.
Surplus arising after termination of a development arrangement and transfer of consolidated property rights is distinguished from compensation for destruction of a profit-making apparatus. Where contractual restraints prolonged the commercial sterilisation of rights, termination restored pre-existing rights and acquisition of reversionary rights completed a transferable bundle; on these facts, the surplus was treated as taxable capital gains rather than a non-taxable capital receipt or business income. A business-income disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was considered inapplicable to capital-gains computation. Expenditure or liability directly connected with removing encroachments and resolving boundary disputes may be allowable when genuinely incurred and sufficiently crystallised, subject to verification of documents, quantum, and nexus with the transfer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.