https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468118 A joint development agreement did not amount to a transfer for capital gains purposes because possession was granted only for development, the agreement excluded part performance under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the amount received was only a refundable performance security. The capital gains addition was therefore deleted. A search addition for gold jewellery also failed because the assessee gave a contemporaneous explanation under section 132(4), supported by affidavits and confirmations, and no contrary material rebutted that explanation. The jewellery addition was accordingly deleted. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:01:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468118 A joint development agreement did not amount to a transfer for capital gains purposes because possession was granted only for development, the agreement excluded part performance under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the amount received was only a refundable performance security. The capital gains addition was therefore deleted. A search addition for gold jewellery also failed because the assessee gave a contemporaneous explanation under section 132(4), supported by affidavits and confirmations, and no contrary material rebutted that explanation. The jewellery addition was accordingly deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468118