https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764398 A development agreement under which the developer was to construct and the owner was to receive a stipulated built-up area did not amount to a transfer for capital gains purposes. The amount mentioned in the agreement was only a refundable performance guarantee, and possession was given only for the limited purpose of development work. On these facts, the requirements of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 were not satisfied, so the transaction did not fall within section 2(47)(v) or section 2(47)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The finding that capital gains arose in assessment year 1997-98 was unsustainable. en-us Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jan 2025 18:43:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764398 A development agreement under which the developer was to construct and the owner was to receive a stipulated built-up area did not amount to a transfer for capital gains purposes. The amount mentioned in the agreement was only a refundable performance guarantee, and possession was given only for the limited purpose of development work. On these facts, the requirements of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 were not satisfied, so the transaction did not fall within section 2(47)(v) or section 2(47)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The finding that capital gains arose in assessment year 1997-98 was unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764398