https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382844 A development agreement, read with approval under section 269-UL and the doctrine of part performance under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, was treated as a transfer within section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act because it clearly identified the immovable property and the transfer of undivided shares. The agreed contractual cost of construction could not be replaced by a departmental estimate absent contrary material, and damages paid for delay did not enlarge capital gains. Rental deposit and rent-free accommodation were not part of the transfer consideration. On the facts, exemption under section 54 was available because the transfer covered both land and the building. en-us Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Dec 2019 15:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382844 A development agreement, read with approval under section 269-UL and the doctrine of part performance under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, was treated as a transfer within section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act because it clearly identified the immovable property and the transfer of undivided shares. The agreed contractual cost of construction could not be replaced by a departmental estimate absent contrary material, and damages paid for delay did not enlarge capital gains. Rental deposit and rent-free accommodation were not part of the transfer consideration. On the facts, exemption under section 54 was available because the transfer covered both land and the building. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382844