<?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>2012 (11) TMI 1112 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177544</link>
    <description>The transfer date for capital gains purposes may fall on the sale agreement date if vacant physical possession was handed over and the arrangement amounted to part performance under section 2(47)(v). In that event, the stamp valuation relevant for section 50C would depend on the guideline value prevailing on that earlier transfer date rather than the later registered sale deed date. The record also noted a rectification deed and affidavit suggesting that the later recital on possession may have been a drafting error, but the actual handing over of possession and the applicable SRO rate still required verification. The matter therefore called for fresh enquiry on the date of transfer and the correct stamp value, and section 50C was not finally applied on the existing record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jun 2017 17:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 1112 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177544</link>
      <description>The transfer date for capital gains purposes may fall on the sale agreement date if vacant physical possession was handed over and the arrangement amounted to part performance under section 2(47)(v). In that event, the stamp valuation relevant for section 50C would depend on the guideline value prevailing on that earlier transfer date rather than the later registered sale deed date. The record also noted a rectification deed and affidavit suggesting that the later recital on possession may have been a drafting error, but the actual handing over of possession and the applicable SRO rate still required verification. The matter therefore called for fresh enquiry on the date of transfer and the correct stamp value, and section 50C was not finally applied on the existing record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>