Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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.