Income Tax : Bombay High Court has held that the mere fact that an agreement for sale of property is registered does not make it a conveyance, ...
Income Tax : Designed with the advantages of a flexible organisational structure, perpetual succession, limited liability and tax efficient dis...
Income Tax : We see many big business houses run by second or third generation families with different ideologies or intending to diversify the...
Income Tax : Under the existing provisions of the Act, conversion of security from one form to another is regarded as transfer for the purpose ...
Income Tax : Under clause (vib) of section 47 of the Income-tax Act any capital asset transferred by the demerged company to the resulting comp...
Income Tax : ACIT Vs Ashwin S. Bhalekar Beamon Chambers (ITAT Mumbai) Claim of the assessee that extinguishment of rights in the capital asset ...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Stock- in-trade can be considered as transferred only in the year in which the assessee has executed the sale deed ...
Income Tax : Amount paid to a partner upon retirement after taking accounts and upon deduction of liabilities did not involve an element of tra...
Income Tax : Conversion of cumulative and compulsory convertible preference shares(CCPS) into equity shares cannot be treated as ‘transfer’...
Income Tax : K. Vijaya Lakshmi Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) The development agreement implied that assessee did permit the developer to enter into ...
By virtue of JDA, assessee was parting with a portion of its land and in consideration thereof, was receiving built-up area on the land retained by it which was a transfer within the meaning of section 2(47)(v) however, AO was directed to re-compute the capital gain again by considering only elements which were necessary for the construction of the building as the cost of construction, and not the entire expenditure of the builder, including the compensation agreed to be paid to K and also the finance charges etc., which were not relevant for computing the cost of the construction.
CIT Vs Harbour View (Kerala High Court) We find that the Tribunal went wrong in holding that the possession was not handed over in pursuance of the agreement for sale as contemplated under section 53A of the TP Act. Once the sale agreement comes under the provisions of section 53A of the TP Act, handing […]
Under section 2(47)(v ) any transaction involving allowing of possession to be taken over or retained in part performance of a contract of the nature referred to in section 53A of the 1882 Act would come within the ambit of section 2(47)(v).
Holding period for purpose of transfer u/s 2(47) was to be considered from the time of agreement to sale instead of execution of sale deed
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. The challenge is to the judgement and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench A at Pune (for short Appellate Tribunal) on 30th April, 2014. The substantial questions of law which are placed into service are the questions which reads thus:
Admittedly, possession of the property was not handed over during assessment year 2008-09 and mere execution of agreement for the development of the property could not amount to transfer under section 2(47) of the Act row with section 53A of the transfer of property Act are satisfied as such there can no transfer be considered in the year under consideration.
We see many big business houses run by second or third generation families with different ideologies or intending to diversify their businesses. Occasionally, it leads to separation of business and to family disputes. While most settle the issues amongst themselves, some families drag them to court.
Under the existing provisions of the Act, conversion of security from one form to another is regarded as transfer for the purpose of levy of capital gains tax. However, tax neutrality to the conversion of bond or debenture of a company to share or debenture of that company is provided under the section 47.
In the case of shares of unlisted companies, transfer would take place, only when valid share transfer form in form no. 7B is delivered to the company and endorsed by the Company. Therefore, for effective transfer of shares a mere agreement for transfer of shares is not sufficient, unless it is physically transfer shares by delivery of share certificate along with duly signed and stamped share transfer form.
ITAT held that Section 53A of 1882 Act, by incorporation, stood embodied in section 2(47)(v) of the Act and all the essential ingredients of Section 53A of 1882 Act were required to be fulfilled to attract sec 2(47). In the absence of registration of JDA
