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 ...
Transfer of unexpired leasehold rights was treated as a taxable supply of service because only the right to use immovable property for the balance lease period was assigned, not title in the land, so the transaction did not fall within sale of land under Schedule III. The Authority also held that decisions cited by the appellant had not attained finality, while Safari Retreats was inapplicable because it concerned input tax credit on construction for leasing, not the taxability of leasehold assignments. Separately, recovery of land development cost was held taxable as consideration for construction and development services, since the underlying works were distinct, identifiable services enhancing the premises. The appeal was dismissed and the advance ruling upheld.
Transfer of unexpired leasehold rights was treated as a taxable supply of service because only the right to use immovable property for the balance lease period was assigned, not title in the land, so the transaction did not fall within sale of land under Schedule III. The Authority also held that decisions cited by the appellant had not attained finality, while Safari Retreats was inapplicable because it concerned input tax credit on construction for leasing, not the taxability of leasehold assignments. Separately, recovery of land development cost was held taxable as consideration for construction and development services, since the underlying works were distinct, identifiable services enhancing the premises. The appeal was dismissed and the advance ruling upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.