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...
Revision u/s 263 - The Tribunal concluded that the assessing officer had conducted a reasonable inquiry into the relevant issues, and the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Despite the discrepancy between the intended scrutiny and the actual assessment, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the assessment order. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the application of Instruction No. 9/2007, stating its inapplicability to the case at hand. - In light of the findings, the High Court dismissed the appeal, as it found no question of law arising from the impugned order.
Revision u/s 263 - The Tribunal concluded that the assessing officer had conducted a reasonable inquiry into the relevant issues, and the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Despite the discrepancy between the intended scrutiny and the actual assessment, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the assessment order. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the application of Instruction No. 9/2007, stating its inapplicability to the case at hand. - In light of the findings, the High Court dismissed the appeal, as it found no question of law arising from the impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.