https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253624 In a sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, ownership passes according to the parties' intention as shown by the contract, conduct and surrounding circumstances; mere postponement of payment or delivery does not by itself defer title. On the facts, no binding condition was proved showing that the transfer was contingent on payment, and the machine had been delivered before the relevant cut-off date. The transaction was therefore not treated as a conditional sale, ownership was held to have passed on delivery, and the assessee's claim to 100% depreciation was upheld. en-us Mon, 17 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Nov 2014 15:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253624 In a sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, ownership passes according to the parties' intention as shown by the contract, conduct and surrounding circumstances; mere postponement of payment or delivery does not by itself defer title. On the facts, no binding condition was proved showing that the transfer was contingent on payment, and the machine had been delivered before the relevant cut-off date. The transaction was therefore not treated as a conditional sale, ownership was held to have passed on delivery, and the assessee's claim to 100% depreciation was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253624