{"id":7985,"date":"2020-06-27T09:57:28","date_gmt":"2020-06-27T04:27:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/?p=7985"},"modified":"2020-06-27T09:57:28","modified_gmt":"2020-06-27T04:27:28","slug":"deferment-of-tax-issues-arising-in-the-context-of-section-455a-of-the-income-tax-act-1961","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/deferment-of-tax-issues-arising-in-the-context-of-section-455a-of-the-income-tax-act-1961\/","title":{"rendered":"Deferment Of Tax &#8211; Issues Arising In The Context Of Section 45(5A) Of The Income-tax Act, 1961"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Advocate-Ranu-Jain.jpg\" alt=\"Advocate-Ranu-Jain\" width=\"83\" height=\"100\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-7704\" \/><strong>The taxability of capital gains arising from Joint Development Agreements (JDAs) has been a subject matter of ongoing controversy. Section 45(5A) was inserted in the Income-tax Act, 1961 to incorporate special provisions for the taxability of these agreements. Advocate Rano Jain, a former Member of the ITAT, has explained the nuances of the entire law on the topic in a succinct and clear manner <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><u>INTRODUCTION<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the main components of one&rsquo;s  income for Income Tax purposes is &lsquo;Capital gains&rsquo;. On transfer of a capital  asset what a person earns or loses is assessed under this head. Chargeability  and other related provisions of capital gains are contained in Part E of  Chapter IV of the Income Tax Act. The term &lsquo;transfer&rsquo; is defined under section  2(47) of the Act. Generally, on transfer of a capital asset, after deducting  the cost at which the asset was acquired out of the sale consideration  received, what results is the amount of capital gain\/loss. This computation is  subject to various other provisions as provided under the Act. However, one  thing is very clear that the capital gain arises at the instance of transfer of  the capital asset.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>\n  However, a deviation from this  general rule was provided by the Finance Act, 2017, by inserting a new sub  section (5A) to section 45, with effect from 01.04.2018, i.e. Assessment Year  2018-19. This provision defers the point of taxability from the point of  transfer, in cases of Joint Development Agreements (JDAs), which are referred  to in the provision as &lsquo;specified agreements&rsquo;.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>LEGISLATIVE ENCOMPASS<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  Section 4 of the Income-tax Act is  the charging section by which income of a person is charged in respect of total  income of the previous year, unless any other situation has been provided by  any provision of this Act. Total income is the aggregate amount of income of an  assessee from whatever source derived and as arises, accrues or is received in  the previous year as is computed under the relevant provisions of the Act.  Income includes capital gains arising on transfer of a capital asset. Section  45 deals with capital gains. Sub-section (1) of section 45 of the Act  originally provides for the charging to tax the capital gains. According to  this sub-section, any profits or gains arising from transfer of capital asset  effected in the previous year shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head  &#8216;Capital gains&#8217; and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in  which the transfer took place. By virtue of this provision capital gain has  been treated as income of the previous year in which the transfer is taken  place.<strong><u><\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  The provisions of sub section (5A)  introduced as above, reads as under:<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&ldquo;(5A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section  (1), where the capital gain arises to an assessee, being an individual or a  Hindu undivided family, from the transfer of a capital asset, being land or  building or both, under a specified agreement, the capital gains shall be  chargeable to income-tax as income of the previous year in which the  certificate of completion for the whole or part of the project is issued by the  competent authority; and for the purposes of section 48, the stamp duty value, on  the date of issue of the said certificate, of his share, being land or building  or both in the project, as increased by the consideration received in cash, if  any, shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or  accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset:<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall  not apply where the assessee transfers his share in the project on or before  the date of issue of the said certificate of completion, and the capital gains  shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which such transfer  takes place and the provisions of this Act, other than the provisions of this  sub-section, shall apply for the purpose of determination of full value of  consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><em>Explanation<\/em><\/strong><em>.-For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression-<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>(i) &ldquo;competent authority&rdquo; means the authority empowered  to approve the building plan by or under any law for the time being in force;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>(ii) &ldquo;specified agreement&rdquo; means a registered agreement  in which a person owning land or building or both, agrees to allow another  person to develop a real estate project on such land or building or both, in  consideration of a share, being land or building or both in such project,  whether with or without payment of part of the consideration in cash;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>(iii) &ldquo;stamp duty value&rdquo; means the value adopted or  assessed or assessable by any authority of the Government for the purpose of  payment of stamp duty in respect of an immovable property being land or  building or both.&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  The provision starts with a non obstante clause and is  applicable only to individuals and HUFs. In case an owner of land, building or  both, transfers such an asset through the JDA, the capital gain arising out of  such transfer is provided to be taxable not at the time of transfer, but at the  time of issue of completion certificate with respect to such asset. It is quite  understandable that in most of the cases the completion certificate will be  issued after the date of transfer of asset only. Though there may be a few  stray instances in which the time of transfer may succeed the time of issue of  completion certificate. In this manner, the provision defers the incidence of  tax from the incidence of transfer. Since, in general, the Income Tax Act  visualises situations of straight transfers, apart from a few provisions like  45(2).&nbsp; All the other provisions of the  Act, relating to computation of &lsquo;capital gains&rsquo; are in sync with each other.  However, this deferment of taxability arising out of emergence of this new  provision will certainly pose certain difficulties.<\/p>\n<p>\n  Before discussing the said difficulties, one should  understand the legislative intent behind the act of bringing such a provision  under the Act.<\/p>\n<p>\n  The Memorandum explaining the  provisions of Finance Bill, 2017 states as under with respect to the  introduction of Sec.&nbsp;45(5A):<\/p>\n<p>\n  &ldquo;<em>With a view to minimise the  genuine hardship which the owner of land may face in paying capital gains tax  in the year of transfer, it is proposed to insert a new sub-section (5A) in  section 45 so as to provide that in case of an assessee being individual or  Hindu undivided family, who enters into a specified agreement for development  of a project, the capital gains shall be chargeable to income-tax as income of  the previous year in which the certificate of completion for the whole or part  of the project is issued by the competent authority.<\/em>&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>\n  In this modern era of complicated  joint development agreements with respect to immovable properties, it has become  very common to transfer the property to a developer by entering into JDA, on  completion of the development, the agreed portion of the developed property  together with or without the additional consideration is given back to the  owner. In these types of real estate projects which many a times would be very  large projects, there is always a time lag between the date of transfer and  date of realisation of sale consideration. In such a situation if the  transferor is required to pay taxes at the time of transfer, he may have to  face many difficulties, on account of cash crunch, having not received the sale  consideration as yet and mainly on account of complication in taking the value  of the property in kind to be taken as sale consideration, the property which  is not yet received by him. In order to remove this hardship, this provision  has come under the statute.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In this write up, an attempt has been made to analyse the various issues  which are likely to arise, out of such deferment of taxability.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>DATE OF TRANSFER IS FROZEN<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  The term  &lsquo;transfer&rsquo; has been defined under section 2(47) of the Act. As section 45(5A)  deals only with the capital assets being in the nature of land or building. For  this the definition of transfer as provided under section 2(47) includes any sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset, or the  extinguishment of any rights therein. It may also include transfers in the  nature of any transaction involving the allowing of the possession of any  immovable property to be taken or retained in part performance of a contract of  the nature referred to in section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.<\/p>\n<p>\n  As the transfer is so well defined under the Act and no diversion is  provided even under section 45(5A), the date of transfer has been made rigid by  the instance of transfer as per this provision. Only the instance of taxability  has been deferred by it. There is a very less likelihood for the date of  transfer and taxability to coincide in cases of Joint Development Agreements.<\/p>\n<p>\n  Another such instance under the Act is section 45(2), where also the date  of transfer is deferred. In that section a situation is envisaged, where a  capital asset is converted into stock in trade, capital gain is though taken to  have arisen on the date of such conversion, the taxability arises only at the  time of sale of the stock, which came into existence on conversion of the  capital asset. The intention is clearly to tax the person at the time the  consideration is realised, as on the date of conversion only the nature of  asset changes from investment to inventory and nothing actually realises on  that day. The similar intention is there in section 45(5A), as on the date of  transfer nothing would have actually realised. However, it is to be borne in  mind that in such a situation the property actually gets transferred on a date  preceding the chargeability of tax.<strong><u> <\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>PERIOD OF HOL<\/u><\/strong><strong><u>DING<\/u><\/strong><strong><u> <\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  As is well  known that the taxability of capital gains depends upon a number of factors,  out of which one of the most important is the period of holding. In very  general terms the time lag between the acquisition and transfer of asset is  taken as the period of holding and that period predicts whether the capital  gain arising is short term or long term.<\/p>\n<p>\n  At the time  of amendment in section 2(24) in the definition of the term &lsquo;income&rsquo;, by  inserting clause (xiia) providing for fair market value of the inventory as on  the date of its conversion to be treated as income, a simultaneous amendment  was brought into section 2(42A), by inserting clause (ba) to Explanation-1,  which provided for determining the period of holding to be reckoned from the  date of its conversion into the capital asset. This amendment was introduced by  Finance Act, 2018, w.e.f. 01.04.2019 to introduce the taxability of capital  gains in a situation where the stock is converted into investment, almost as a  converse of section 45(2). In this situation though the taxability is not  deferred, still specific provision was inserted to clarify that the period of  holding for the purpose of determining whether the gain is long term or short  term, is to be taken from the date of its conversion.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In case of  section 45(5A), though the provision calls for deferment of tax from the date  of actual transfer, still no such specific provision is provided to clarify how  the period of holding is to be computed. In such a situation normal provisions  of the Act will prevail.<\/p>\n<p>\n  The  substantive part of section 2(42A) giving the meaning of the term &lsquo;short term  capital asset&rsquo; reads as under:<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&quot;short-term capital asset&quot;  means a capital asset held by an assessee for not more than&nbsp;thirty-six<strong> <\/strong>months  immediately preceding the date of <strong>its transfer<\/strong>.&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  Further, in the third Proviso to  section 2(42A), by Finance Act, 2017, w.e.f. 01.04.2018, it was inserted that  in case of immovable property being land, building or both the period of  holding for this purpose is taken to be 24 months immediately preceding the  date of transfer.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In the scenarios envisaged by section  45(5A), the transfer takes place at the time of transfer as defined under  section 2(47), the tax may be imposed at a later date when the completion  certificate is issued but even at that time for the purposes of capital gain,  the period between the acquisition and transfer of property is to be computed.  This may lead to certain weird situations. For example, an assessee transfers a  property under JDA to the developer for development after only a period of six  months of its acquisition, the completion certificate is issued, say, after  five years of such transfer. The capital gain would be taxable after a period  of more than five years from the acquisition, however only as short term  capital gain, since the period of holding between acquisition and transfer is  only six months. <\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>INDEXATION<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  Section 48  provides for the mode of computation of capital gains. The second Proviso to  this section also provides for indexation of cost of acquisition in cases of  transfer of long term capital asset. Clause (iii) of Explanation under this  section defines the term &lsquo;indexed cost of acquisition&rsquo; as under;<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&ldquo;(iii) &quot;indexed cost of  acquisition&quot; means an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the  same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is <strong>transferred<\/strong> bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset was  held by the assessee or for the year beginning on the&nbsp;1st day of April,  2001&nbsp;, whichever is later;&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  The law is very clear that the  indexation benefit will be given to the extent of cost inflation index till the  year of transfer. Suppose a land or building which was acquired by an  individual before 2001 and the same is transferred for development under a JDA  to the developer as on 31st March 2019, the completion certificate  is issued sometime in the April 2025. In such a case the long term capital gain  arising to the assessee on transfer of asset will be chargeable to tax in the  Assessment Year 2026-27, while, it appears that the indexed cost of acquisition  will be computed by taking cost inflation index for the year 2020 only. Since  the &lsquo;transfer&rsquo; took place in the Financial Year 2019-20 only.<\/p>\n<p>\n  Now we will try to get some benefit  from the judicial pronouncement delivered in the context of 45(2). In these  cases also the instance of tax is deferred. There is a judgement of the hon&rsquo;ble  Karnataka High Court, in the case of CIT Vs. Rudra Industrial Commercial Corporation. &nbsp;IT Appeal No. 3119 of 2005, dt. 25.01.2011,  where the issue was the allowability of benefit of indexation, in the case of  sale of stock which was converted in stock from investment, as is envisaged in  section 45(2) of the Act. The High Court, observed as under:<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&ldquo;Explanation (iii) to s. 48 defines indexed cost of  acquisition which means an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the  same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is  transferred bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the  asset was held by the assessee or for the year beginning on the 1st day of  April, 1981, whichever is later. &nbsp;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>12. A harmonious interpretation of these two provisions  makes it clear as to how the capital gains is to be taken into consideration.  First we have to find out what is the fair market value of the asset on the  date of conversion, then to find out what is the market value of the property  on the date of transfer. So, in order to compute the capital gains payable, it  is the market value on the date of transfer that is relevant and in arriving at  that market value the index cost of acquisition as prescribed on the date of  transfer is to be taken into consideration and not the date of conversion. In  the instant case, the index cost of acquisition was 223 on the date of transfer  in the year ending 1993 and the index cost of acquisition on the date of  conversion is 161. Therefore, the AO committed a serious error in taking 161 as  the index. The appellate authorities have rightly interfered with the said  assessment and have taken 223 as correct index cost of acquisition. Therefore,  when the impugned order passed by the appellate authorities is in accordance  with the aforesaid statutory provisions, the said substantial questions of law  have to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.&rdquo;&nbsp;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  Following decisions were rendered by  the ITAT, following the above judgement of the Karnataka High Court:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span dir=\"ltr\">Sakthi  Sugars  Ltd. Vs. <\/span>DCIT, IT.A.Nos. 866\/Mds\/2016,  IT.A.Nos. 1107\/Mds\/2016, Dt.23.06.2017 (Chennai Trib)<\/li>\n<li><span dir=\"ltr\">Mather  &amp;  Platt  Pumps Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT<\/span>, &nbsp;ITA No. 351\/PN\/2009, ITA No. 368\/PN\/2009, ITA No.  302\/PN\/2010, ITA No. 1000\/PN\/2012, dt. 28.10.2013 (Pune- Trib)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In these cases, the court has provided the benefit of  indexation till the year of taxability of capital gain, even if the capital  gain arose in earlier year.<\/p>\n<p>\n  However, while applying these case laws, one has to keep  the basic difference between the situation perceived under section 45(2) and  45(5A), in mind. In case of conversion of capital asset\/investment in the stock  in trade, there is no actual transfer of the asset. At this point of time, it  is only the nature of the property that has changed, the asset itself remains  with the owner, there is no actual transfer. While in cases referred under  section 45(5A), there is actual transfer of asset at the instance of  &lsquo;transfer&rsquo;, it is only that due to certain practical difficulties arising out  of JDAs, the law has deferred the point of taxation.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In this way, though the reliance can be placed on the  above judgements, however what the view of judiciary will come is yet to be  seen.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>COST<\/u><\/strong><strong><u> OF I<\/u><\/strong><strong><u>MPR<\/u><\/strong><strong><u>OVEMENT- TILL WHICH DATE<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  Very similar  to the provisions related to cost of acquisition are the provisions related to  the cost of improvement. Clause (iv) to the Proviso to section 48, defines  &lsquo;indexed cost of improvement&rsquo; as follows:<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&ldquo;(iv) &quot;indexed cost of any  improvement&quot; means an amount which bears to the cost of improvement the  same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is  transferred bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the  improvement to the asset took place;&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  The cost of improvement incurred by  an assessee on the capital asset, transferred is recognized only till the date  of transfer. Therefore in our earlier example only improvements done till the  date of transfer will be given, even if the capital gain is taxed years after  transfer.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In any case, the property has in fact  been actually transferred to the developer, generally no expenses would be  incurred by the owner after the date of transfer, on account of improvement of  the property.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 54\/54F<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  In the case  of transfer on immovable property, certain exemptions are provided under the  Act out of capital gain arising on such transfer. These exemptions are provided  under sections 54, 54E, 54EC, 54F etc. The purpose of all these exemptions  seems to give incentive to further invest the sale consideration received on  transfer of a capital asset into some other form of capital asset. In all these  provisions a time line is given to reinvest the sale consideration into new asset,  with reference to the date of transfer. The issue is in cases referred to in  section 45(5A), as the sale consideration is not realised at the time of  transfer, how can an assessee be expected to reinvest the same after transfer.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In the  context of section 45(2), where an investment is converted into stock and the  transferred, the CBDT had issued a circular no. 791, dt 02.06.2000, which came  out in the context specifically of exemptions provided in section  54EA\/54EB\/54EC. In this circular it was provided that for the purposes of these  exemptions date of transfer has to be taken as the sale of transfer of stock in  trade only.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In the case  of &nbsp;<strong>Rajesh  Kumar Adukia vs. DCIT<\/strong>, ITA 14\/Ran\/2018, dated 30.10.2019&nbsp;, the Ranchi  bench of the tribunal held as under:<\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>20. At thus juncture, I take  cognizance of <\/em><em>CBD<\/em><em>T Circular No.791 dated 2.6.2000 (supra), which  clarified that for the purpose of claiming deduction u\/s. 54EA\/54EB\/54EC, the  date of transfer shall be the date on which the stock-in-trade is sold or  otherwise transferred by the assessee and not on the date of conversion of the  capital asset into stock-in-trade. Further, Special Bench of ITAT Kolkata in  the case of Octavius Steel &amp; Co. Ltd (supra) has held that on conversion of  capital asset into stock-in-trade, there is no profit as no can make profit out  of himself. Further, as per amended sub-section(2) of section 45 of the Act,  which was inserted by the Taxation Legislation (Amendment Act), 1984 w.e.f.  1.4.1985, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the profits or  gains arising from the transfer by way of conversion by the owner of a capital  asset into, or its treatment by him as stock-in-trade of a business carried on  by him shall be chargeable to income tax as his income of the previous year in  which such stock in trade is sold or otherwise transferred by him and, for the  purposes of section 48, the fair market value of the asset on the date of such  conversion or treatment shall be deemed to be the full value of the  consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital  asset. Therefore, in view of above CBDT circular and order of Special Bench of  Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Octavius Steel &amp; Co. Ltd  (supra), I have no hesitation to hold that the Assessing Officer was also not  correct in denying benefit of section 54F of the Act to the assessee on the  ground that residential flat was not constructed after the date of transfer but  alongwith saleable flats.&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  This case was also followed by the  another decision of the Ranchi bench of the ITAT in the case of Nisha Sarawagi  vs. ACIT, ITA No. 137\/Ran\/2019, dt. 02.03.2020.<\/p>\n<p>\n  It is to be noted that the circular was specifically for the purposes of  investments mentioned under section 54EA\/54EB\/54EC only. However, taking a cue  from there the ITAT had allowed the extended time limit for the purposes of  investments referred to in section 54F of the Act.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In this manner, it may be observed that the legislature is mindful of the  practical difficulty faced by assesses in such situation, it may be expected  that certain clarification from departmental side may come in this regard. Till  then, the abovesaid circular and decisions may be used for assessee&rsquo;s benefit.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>CAPITAL GAINS ACCOUNT SCHEME<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  In most of  the exemption provisions, there are also provision of depositing the sale  consideration in the Capital Gains Account Scheme, if the assessee is unable to  invest the money within the year of transfer as prescribed under respective  sections. In the context of section 45(5), the same should be applicable from  the date of issue of completion certificate only, as the sale consideration, in  a manner, is assumed to have realised on that day. <\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>WHAT IF TRANSFER IS LATER THEN THE DATE OF ISSUE OF  COMPLETION CERTIFICATE:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  In general  the section envisages a situation, where the completion certificate is issued  after the date of transfer. However, there may be a situation where the  transfer takes place only after the issue of completion certificate. In  practice, generally it may not happen but there may be situations where because  of some dispute between the developer and owner or for any other such reason, the  transfer may get delayed.<\/p>\n<p>\n  It is to be  understood that the capital gain arises only on transfer of an asset. In the  case of above referred situation, it cannot be said that on issue of completion  certificate the capital gain has arisen to the assessee. Therefore, in any  case, capital gain cannot be taxed at the time of issue of completion  certificate. Same has to necessarily be taxed at the time of transfer only.<\/p>\n<p>\n  In this case  the provisions of section 45(5A) will not be applicable and the capital gains will  be taxed in the year of transfer as per normal provisions of the Act. However,  it is to be borne in mind that provisions of section 50C\/43CA referring to the  stamp duty valuation will be duly applicable.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>IF FURTHER TRANSFERRED BEFORE ISSUE OF COMPLETION  CERTIFICATE:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  It is to be  noticed that in JDAs a substantial portion of the sale consideration is  received in the form of developed property, with or without some cash  consideration. The legislature has not been oblivious of the peculiar  situations arising sometime, where the developed portion, which is also the  sale consideration, is transferred before the issue of completion certificate.  The Proviso added to section 45(5A) takes care of such a situation.<\/p>\n<p>\n  As per the  Proviso, if the share of project is transferred before the issue of completion  certificate, the provisions of section 45(5A) will not be applicable on this  transaction and the capital gains will be taxed as per normal provisions of the  Act.<\/p>\n<p>\n  Here also  some practical issues may arise. Suppose the assessee transfers his land  acquired in Financial Year 2010-11 to the developer in the financial year  2014-15, in a JDA. He has to receive a portion of developed land together with  some cash as sale consideration. The completion certificate is issued for the  project in the Financial Year 2019-20, while assessee sells his portion of  developed project in the year 2017-18. In such a situation there are two  transactions resulting in capital gains. First is when the assessee transfers  his original land to the developer. The capital gain will be taxed in the year  of transfer as per normal provisions. In the second transaction when the  assessee transfers his developed portion, the capital gain will again arise in  the year of transfer. In this second instance since the project is not yet  completed or in any case stamp duty of the developed area has not been fixed.  The difficulties will arise in computation of capital gain. However, it is to  be appreciated that these difficulties may arise not because of deferment of  tax under section 45(5A), but because of certain situations not being envisaged  by the parliament while formulating such law.<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>CONCLUSION:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  It can be  seen that the legislature has been foresighted enough to perceive the  difficulties faced under the JDAs, which is becoming a new normal, to make such  laws. However still certain gaps are left, which is very common while bringing  some new provision under any law. In the future, definitely all these issues  will get settled through CBDT circulars or clarificatory amendments. In any  case judiciary, in the times to come, will settle all these issues.<\/p>\n<table width=\"103%\" border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"5\" cellspacing=\"0\" bgcolor=\"#FFFFCC\">\n<tr>\n<td><strong>Disclaimer: <\/strong>The  contents of this document are solely for informational purpose. It does not  constitute professional advice or a formal recommendation. While due care has  been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions  herein is not ruled out. Neither the author nor itatonline.org and its  affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising  out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this document nor for any  actions taken in reliance thereon. No part of this document should be  distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without  express written permission of itatonline.org<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The taxability of capital gains arising from Joint Development Agreements (JDAs) has been a subject matter of ongoing controversy. Section 45(5A) was inserted in the Income-tax Act, 1961 to incorporate special provisions for the taxability of these agreements. Advocate Rano Jain, a former Member of the ITAT, has explained the nuances of the entire law on the topic in a succinct and clear manner<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/deferment-of-tax-issues-arising-in-the-context-of-section-455a-of-the-income-tax-act-1961\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7985","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7985","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7985"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7985\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7985"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}