<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (9) TMI 73 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263405</link>
    <description>Unregistered agreements for transfer of immovable property executed after the 2001 amendment cannot establish part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Accordingly, such agreements cannot by themselves prove that possession transferred for a capital-gains exemption claim. Agricultural-land status requires supporting evidence of agricultural operations; barren land and absence of cultivation may negate that character. Seized sale agreements and corroborating sworn statements may support adoption of sale consideration, while the taxpayer bears the burden of proving any claimed purchase consideration. Rapid resale, absence of agricultural use, and surrounding circumstances may support characterisation of a transaction as an adventure in the nature of trade. Concurrent factual findings generally do not raise a substantial question of law in further appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 18:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 73 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263405</link>
      <description>Unregistered agreements for transfer of immovable property executed after the 2001 amendment cannot establish part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Accordingly, such agreements cannot by themselves prove that possession transferred for a capital-gains exemption claim. Agricultural-land status requires supporting evidence of agricultural operations; barren land and absence of cultivation may negate that character. Seized sale agreements and corroborating sworn statements may support adoption of sale consideration, while the taxpayer bears the burden of proving any claimed purchase consideration. Rapid resale, absence of agricultural use, and surrounding circumstances may support characterisation of a transaction as an adventure in the nature of trade. Concurrent factual findings generally do not raise a substantial question of law in further appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>