Case Law Details
Case Name : Hillside Construction Company. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income tax (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2004-05
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Mumbai
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
The taxpayer instead of developing the land, transferred the development rights in respect of part of the land to a separate construction company.As per the agreement, the taxpayer jointly with the trust was required to convey the land to the proposed buyers. Instead of developing land, the taxpayer parted with the development rights in respect of part of the land forever. The possession of the land had also been given during the year along with development rights. This was an independent activity having no connection with the development of the remaining part of the land.
The taxpayer was f...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
The judgement is as per law and accrual system of accounting as per law. But what the Lawer or the CA of the firm failed to guide the client is payment of taxes in the year of accrual and he need cash/money for that. In our Indian system there is no support to the injured party where taxes once levied become a liability and should be paid, but when the actual payment is defaulted by the party entirely including the principal of sale or transaction. There is no remedy to it. Why not the court also look into the aspect of it?