Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
A joint development agreement alone does not trigger a transfer for capital gains purposes where possession is handed to the developer only for carrying out development and no consideration has been received or accrued to the landowner. The tribunal applied prior appellate and high court authorities to conclude that in the absence of consideration or possession transferred in the manner required to create equitable title, there is no accrual of capital gains in the year of the JDA; accordingly, no taxable capital gains arose for the year under consideration and the appeal was decided for the assessee.
A joint development agreement alone does not trigger a transfer for capital gains purposes where possession is handed to the developer only for carrying out development and no consideration has been received or accrued to the landowner. The tribunal applied prior appellate and high court authorities to conclude that in the absence of consideration or possession transferred in the manner required to create equitable title, there is no accrual of capital gains in the year of the JDA; accordingly, no taxable capital gains arose for the year under consideration and the appeal was decided for the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.