<?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>1988 (2) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24471</link>
    <description>Section 230A of the Income-tax Act barred registration only where the document dealt with a person&#039;s transferable right, title or interest, and a contract for sale under section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act did not itself create any interest in immovable property. A confirming party who had no transferable interest and was not the owner-transferor under the conveyance was therefore outside the scope of the clearance requirement. The explanation in section 2(6) of the Registration Act could not be expanded beyond its scheme, and the phrase covering other benefits arising out of land had to be read ejusdem generis. The confirming party was not required to obtain an income-tax clearance certificate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 12:55:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (2) TMI 7 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24471</link>
      <description>Section 230A of the Income-tax Act barred registration only where the document dealt with a person&#039;s transferable right, title or interest, and a contract for sale under section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act did not itself create any interest in immovable property. A confirming party who had no transferable interest and was not the owner-transferor under the conveyance was therefore outside the scope of the clearance requirement. The explanation in section 2(6) of the Registration Act could not be expanded beyond its scheme, and the phrase covering other benefits arising out of land had to be read ejusdem generis. The confirming party was not required to obtain an income-tax clearance certificate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24471</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>