Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that handing over possession of land to a developer for construction purposes under a development agreement, without actual transfer of ownership or payment of consideration, does not constitute a 'transfer' u/s 2(47) of the Income Tax Act to attract capital gains tax. The performance guarantee amount is refundable and not consideration. The HC distinguished the cases of Potla Nageswara Rao and Arvind S Phake, where transfer was complete with possession handover and consideration payment. The Tribunal's finding that the assessee handed over full possession for 60% constructed area and was liable for capital gains during the relevant year was held perverse.
The HC held that handing over possession of land to a developer for construction purposes under a development agreement, without actual transfer of ownership or payment of consideration, does not constitute a 'transfer' u/s 2(47) of the Income Tax Act to attract capital gains tax. The performance guarantee amount is refundable and not consideration. The HC distinguished the cases of Potla Nageswara Rao and Arvind S Phake, where transfer was complete with possession handover and consideration payment. The Tribunal's finding that the assessee handed over full possession for 60% constructed area and was liable for capital gains during the relevant year was held perverse.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.