TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said property covered under the said documents has not been delivered as mandatorily required under Section 53-A of the T.P. Act. In fact, the contents of the said documents will clearly indicate that there is no recital with regard to the petitioner handing over possession or putting the party in possession in part performance as required under Section 53- A of the T.P. Act. Sale Agreement under which, the petitioner is said to have agreed to sell the said land in favour of the third party is also not a registered document as required under Section 17(1-A) of the Registration Act and on this ground also, it cannot be said that the petitioner had delivered or put the other party in possession in part performance for the purpose of Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cting the first respondent to produce the government notification dated 17.04.2007 and the information obtained from the office of the Sub Registrar showing comparative sale instances for purpose of valuation of stock on 01.04.2010 based on which assessment order against the assessee is passed. c. Issue a writ of declaration that in the light of the settlement of legal position in subsequent judgments by the Apex Court in Delhi Development Authority Vs.Gaurav Kukreja, Suraj Lamp Industries Pvt., Ltd., Vs. State of Haryana Anr., CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini the liability to capital gains tax would arise only after project is completed and consideration received by the assessee and not during execution of the agreements. c(i) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sfer within the meaning of Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act, the respondents were clearly committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the said documents constituted a transfer within the meaning of Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act, thereby, calling upon the petitioner to pay capital gains tax on the amount received pursuant to the said documents. It is submitted apart from the fact that the Assessing Officer has failed to consider the said aspect of the matter, in particular, that in the absence of possession being delivered in part performance of the contract as mandatorily required under Section 53-A of the T.P Act, Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act would not be applicable and there would not be any liability to pay capital gains tax. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents has not been delivered as mandatorily required under Section 53-A of the T.P. Act. In fact, the contents of the said documents will clearly indicate that there is no recital with regard to the petitioner handing over possession or putting the party in possession in part performance as required under Section 53- A of the T.P. Act. Further, the Sale Agreement dated 14.08.2012 under which, the petitioner is said to have agreed to sell the said land in favour of the third party is also not a registered document as required under Section 17(1-A) of the Registration Act and on this ground also, it cannot be said that the petitioner had delivered or put the other party in possession in part performance for the purpose of Section 53- A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
