Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Land executed under a development agreement-cum-power of attorney was held assessable in the individual owners' hands because legal title vested in them and the documents were executed by them personally, while the asserted partition was treated only as an internal family arrangement and not proof of HUF ownership. The Tribunal further held that the agreement granted the developer only a limited licence to enter for construction, not effective transfer of possession for capital gains purposes, and no non-refundable consideration had been received. As the essential conditions for transfer were not satisfied in the relevant year, the capital gains addition was deleted.
Land executed under a development agreement-cum-power of attorney was held assessable in the individual owners' hands because legal title vested in them and the documents were executed by them personally, while the asserted partition was treated only as an internal family arrangement and not proof of HUF ownership. The Tribunal further held that the agreement granted the developer only a limited licence to enter for construction, not effective transfer of possession for capital gains purposes, and no non-refundable consideration had been received. As the essential conditions for transfer were not satisfied in the relevant year, the capital gains addition was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
