https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780194 A joint development agreement did not constitute a transfer of immovable property under section 2(47)(v) read with section 53A because the developer was only allowed to enter the land for development, while the owner retained possession and custody of the title deeds. The agreement itself stated that it did not amount to parting with possession or delivery of possession in part performance. On these facts, there was no handing over of possession in the sense required by section 53A, no completed part performance, and no deemed transfer giving rise to capital gains in the year under appeal. The addition was deleted. en-us Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780194 A joint development agreement did not constitute a transfer of immovable property under section 2(47)(v) read with section 53A because the developer was only allowed to enter the land for development, while the owner retained possession and custody of the title deeds. The agreement itself stated that it did not amount to parting with possession or delivery of possession in part performance. On these facts, there was no handing over of possession in the sense required by section 53A, no completed part performance, and no deemed transfer giving rise to capital gains in the year under appeal. The addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780194