https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366375 The High Court ruled that the transfer of land to a developer did not trigger immediate capital gains tax liability as possession transfer occurred upon completion of construction, not at the agreement's execution. The Court emphasized that possession for ownership enjoyment, not mere construction facilitation, determines transfer under Section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act. Additionally, the Court upheld the classification of the constructed area as a fixed asset for depreciation, rejecting the Commissioner's attempt to reclassify it as a current asset. The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the Tribunal's decision and concluding that the Revenue's arguments lacked merit. en-us Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366375 The High Court ruled that the transfer of land to a developer did not trigger immediate capital gains tax liability as possession transfer occurred upon completion of construction, not at the agreement's execution. The Court emphasized that possession for ownership enjoyment, not mere construction facilitation, determines transfer under Section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act. Additionally, the Court upheld the classification of the constructed area as a fixed asset for depreciation, rejecting the Commissioner's attempt to reclassify it as a current asset. The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the Tribunal's decision and concluding that the Revenue's arguments lacked merit. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366375