Only an asset which is capable of acquisition at a cost would be included within the provisions pertaining to the head \u201cCapital gains\u201d as opposed to assets in the acquisition of which no cost at all can be conceived. In the present case as well, the situation was that the FSI\/TDR was generated by the plot itself. There was no cost of acquisition, which has been determined and on the basis of which the Assessing Officer could have proceeded to levy and assess the gains derived as capital gains. It may be that subsection (2) of section 55 clause (a) having been amended, there is a stipulation with regard to the tenancy rights. However, even in the case of tenancy right, the view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after the provision was substituted w.e.f. 1st April, 1995, is as above. The further argument is that the tenancy rights now can be brought within the tax net and in the present case the asset or the benefit is attached to the property. It is capable of being transferred. All this may be true but as the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds it must be capable of being acquired at a cost or that has to be ascertainable. In the present case, additional FSI\/TDR is generated by change in the D. C. Rules. A specific insertion would therefore be necessary so as to ascertain its cost for computing the capital gains. Therefore, the Tribunal was in no error in concluding that the TDR which was generated by the plot\/property\/land and came to be transferred under a document in favour of the purchaser would not result in the gains being assessed to capital gains. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Only an asset which is capable of acquisition at a cost would be included within the provisions pertaining to the head \u201cCapital gains\u201d as opposed to assets in the acquisition of which no cost at all can be conceived. In …<\/p>\n