Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
