https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438760 A contractual clause giving the lessee a first option to purchase immovable property was treated as an enforceable promise, not a transferable right of pre-emption or other capital asset. Once possession had already been surrendered under court orders, no surviving right remained capable of transfer or relinquishment. The settlement payment was therefore characterised as money paid to end litigation and clear title, not consideration for transfer of a capital asset, so capital gains could not be levied. The addition also failed because the alleged right had no ascertainable cost of acquisition. en-us Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jun 2023 15:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438760 A contractual clause giving the lessee a first option to purchase immovable property was treated as an enforceable promise, not a transferable right of pre-emption or other capital asset. Once possession had already been surrendered under court orders, no surviving right remained capable of transfer or relinquishment. The settlement payment was therefore characterised as money paid to end litigation and clear title, not consideration for transfer of a capital asset, so capital gains could not be levied. The addition also failed because the alleged right had no ascertainable cost of acquisition. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438760