Margrit Goverdhan (Mrs.) v. ITO (2023)458 ITR 91 (Karn.)(HC) Arvind Goverdhan (Dr.) v. ITO (2023)458 ITR 91 (Karn.)(HC) Monika Goverdhan (Mrs) v. ITO (2023)458 ITR 91 (Karn.)(HC) Anita Goverdhan Loebbert (Mrs) v. ITO (2023)458 ITR 91 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial : Order of Tribunal in ITO v. Arvind Goverdhan (Dr.) (2018) 61 ITR 159 (Bang)(Trib) is reversed.

S. 45 : Capital gains-Land-Joint Development Agreement-Possession of land only for purposes of development-No transfer of land in 2008-Order of Tribunal is reversed. [S. 2(47)(v), Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S. 53A]

The assessees were joint owners of a piece of land. They entered into a joint development agreement dated November 27, 2008 with Ashed properties and Investments Pvt Ltd., for development of the property. In the said agreement, land owners were entitled to 60 per cent. of the built up area with proportionate undivided interest and the developer to the remaining 40 per cent. The assessees filed returns of income in respect of the assessment year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer  held that joint development agreement was executed in the financial year relevant to the assessment year and they were liable to pay capital gains tax. This was upheld by the Tribunal. On appeal the Court held that   a combined reading of clauses 6.2, 14.1 to 14.3 and 21 of the joint development agreement made it clear that the delivery of possession to the developer was only for the performance of development and construction. Therefore, the view taken by the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal that the transfer was effected in the assessment year 2009-10 and making the assessees liable for payment of capital gains tax was perverse and untenable. Tax could not be levied on capital gains in the assessment year 2009-10.(AY.2009-10, 2010-11)