CIT vs. Sadia Shaikh (Bombay High Court At Goa)

DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: January 30, 2014 (Date of publication)

Click here to download the judgement (sadia_development_agreement_transfer.pdf)

S. 2(47)(v): Mere execution of a development agreement is not a “transfer” if possession as per s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act is not given

Though the development agreement was executed in AY 2003-04, the possession as contemplated in Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act was in fact not handed over by the assessee to the developer. The agreement only permitted the development to be carried out by the said developer. The entire control over the property was in fact with the assessee inasmuch as the licence to construct the property was also in the name of the assessee and the occupancy certificate was also given to the assessee. Therefore the execution of the agreement could not amount to transfer as contemplated under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. The agreement was subsequently specifically modified and the assessee was liable to pay the capital gain as per the last agreement i.e. for assessment year 2008-09.

See also General Glass 108 TTJ 854 (Mum) & Fibars Infratech (ITAT Hyd) where Chaturbhuj Dwarakadas Kapadia 260 ITR 491 (Bom) is explained/ distinguished. Contrast with Charanjit Singh Atwal (ITAT Chd)
One comment on “CIT vs. Sadia Shaikh (Bombay High Court At Goa)
  1. i think Revenue should have really well read legal counsels as the consultants than just depending on these revenue officers for their half knowledge causes deep management legal tax administration besides wastes public exchequer funds in unnecessary litigation and wastes Assessees moneys and really affects economic tax administration that aspect need to be carefully scrutinized by parliament to control governance of governments in power, so that citizens representatives have to take close look in all Revenue administration even in states and thus give directions to States concerned where from the MPs came and the relevant state MPs can advice their states to take meaningful guidance from CAG and State AGs too i believe that may have meaningful control on all Revenue departments, as today it is like a tamil saying says..’thadi edutthavan ellam thandalkaran’ like!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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