Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Ganpatbhai Mayajibhai Baria Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download. Already Upgraded? Login here to access.
Ganpatbhai Mayajibhai Baria Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT Deletes Capital Gains Addition: Agreement to Sell Alone Does Not Amount to Transfer The Ahmedabad ITAT deleted an addition of ₹56.98 lakh made as undisclosed capital gains, holding that the mere execution of a Banakhat (agreement to sell) does not result in a “transfer” under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act unless the conditions of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act are satisfied. The assessee, along with other co-owners, had entered into a notarized agreement to sell agricultural land in March 2018, but the registered...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Interest on Delayed Sales Tax, Service Tax & PF Payments Deductible; TDS Interest Disallowed: Patna ITAT Section 54F Deduction Allowed on Genuine House Purchase from In-Laws: Mumbai ITAT Pune ITAT Quashes Reassessment as Section 148A(b) & 148A(d) Reasons Differed Section 54 Relief Can’t Be Denied Merely Due to Section 50C Addition: Pune ITAT Delhi ITAT Deletes Penny Stock Addition; Suspicion Can’t Replace Evidence View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031