Income Tax : The article explains how Section 45(5A) shifted the capital gains trigger for landowners from JDA execution to issuance of the com...
Income Tax : The new law treats gains from depreciable assets as short-term capital gains for all purposes, not merely for computation. This ef...
Income Tax : The reform replaces dividend-based taxation with capital gains to ensure only real income is taxed. It removes the distortion of t...
Income Tax : Establishes that higher tax burdens on promoters under the new regime require companies to reassess payout strategies. The takeawa...
Income Tax : The distinction between slump sale and itemised asset sale determines how capital gains are taxed. A true slump sale applies Secti...
Income Tax : India and France have signed a protocol granting full taxing rights on capital gains from share sales to the country of company re...
Income Tax : Govt rationalizes long-term capital gains tax, reducing rates to 12.5% and simplifying holding periods. Relief provided for pre-Ju...
Income Tax : Finance Bill 2024 amends Section 55 to include fair market value for unlisted shares in IPOs. Changes apply retroactively from Apr...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill 2024 proposes a streamlined and rationalized taxation system for capital gains, with changes including reduced ho...
Income Tax : From April 1, 2025, Section 47 will exclude transfers of capital assets under gifts or wills from capital gains tax, with specific...
Income Tax : The ITAT ruled that the Assessing Officer wrongly adopted the stamp duty valuation despite contrary valuation material on record. ...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT held that before the amendment effective from 01.04.2015, exemption under Section 54 could be claimed for investment in...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore held that Section 54 exemption cannot be denied merely for failure to deposit capital gains in the Capital Gain Deposi...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that delayed filing or incorrect disclosure in Form 67 does not automatically disentitle an assessee from claim...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld tax addition where agricultural land was acquired below stamp duty valuation and DVO-determined fair market va...
Income Tax : The government has authorised all non-rural branches of 19 banks to operate Capital Gains Account Scheme accounts, enhancing taxpa...
Income Tax : The amendment introduces electronic payment modes for capital gains deposits and clarifies the effective date of deposit. It enhan...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance notifies IREDA bonds issued post-July 9, 2025, as long-term specified assets under Section 54EC for income tax...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance announces amendment to Section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, introducing a new cost inflation index effectiv...
Income Tax : The Ministry of Finance, through the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), issued Notification No. 44/2024-Income-Tax on May 24, 2...
The learned DR has opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee. He submitted that no cost of acquisition was incurred by the assessee as per the terms and conditions of the registered lease deed, and therefore in accordance with the provision of section 55(2)(a)(ii) of the Act, the cost of acquisition has to be taken at NIL. He referred to the term-4 of the lease deed dated 15.9.1966 wherein it was agreed that all the building and structure put up by the lessee on the said land remain the property of the lessee only.
In the background of above legal position, we have to ascertain from the facts on record whether it is possible to ascertain the cost of acquisition of the tenancy rights. We may recall that the assessee and the landlord entered into an agreement under which, the landlord agreed to rent out four existing floors to the assessee, and for three more under construction floors of the building,
Amalgamation does not come within the scope of ‘transfer’ as defined in Section 2(47) of the Act and such being the view taken not only by this court, but Madras High Court and also the Supreme Court, there is no question of holding that the assessee disentitles the benefit of Section 80-I of the Act.
Section 48(1) of the Act provides for mode of computation and deduction while charging capital gain. Clause-I thereof in particular provides for a payment from the value of consideration received or accrued as a result of transfer of capital asset, expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer. The Tribunal found that looking to the peculiar facts of the case noted above, such expenditure cannot be stated to be incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer. We do not find that Tribunal committed any legal error.
When the bona fideof the transaction and the actual sale consideration received by the assessee has not been suspected, then for the purpose of computation of capital gains, the full value of consideration can not be substituted by market price or value of the capital asset as on the date of transfer.
This issue in fact fell for decision before this Court in the case of CIT v. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 130 of 1998, dated 17-12-1998] wherein this Court by its judgment and order has upheld the decision of the Tribunal that the claim of loss of the assessee in the matter of sale of Part B of the PCD in the self-same rights issue is permissible as short-term capital loss.
Deduction under section 24(b) and computation of capital gains under section 48 of the Act are altogether covered by different heads of income i.e., income from ‘house property’ and ‘capital gains’. Further, a perusal of both the provisions makes it unambiguous that none of them excludes operative of the other.
Notification No. 44/2012-Income Tax In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 54, sub-section (2) of section 54B sub-section (2) of section 54D sub-section (4) of section 54F sub-section (2) of section 54G and sub-section (2) of section 54GB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby makes the following Scheme to amend the Capital Gains Account Scheme, 1988, namely:-
Honourable Madras High Court in case of A.S. Jayakumar (supra) has held that unless there is a proof for extra consideration paid by the purchaser over and above what is stated in the sale deed, section 52(2) of the I T Act cannot be invoked.
It is clear from the provisions of Sec. 45(1) , being a deeming provision any gain which has arisen during the year has to be taken for consideration irrespective of the fact that the transferor may receive the sale consideration in subsequent years. Further, the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) that in family members cases, for the capital gains arising out of the transfer of shares, the return of income have been accepted by the department under scrutiny assessment, cannot be accepted under the principles of consistency as we are not bound to follow the decisions of the authorities which are inconsistent with the provisions of section 45(1) of the Act.
