Assessee held land, which was transferred by MIDC in favour of VVI by way of lease, and the rights under the lease were transferred by the lessee to the assessee-company by way of deed of assignment. Assessee claimed that section 50C was not applicable to a property held in leasehold right and thus, tax would not be payable on sale consideration. The Assessing Officer held that the provision of section 50C is applicable.  Order of the Assessing Officer was affirmed by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal. On appeal, the Court held that the word ‘transfer’ as used in section 50C(1), could not be used in a restricted sense and would have to be given widest amplitude, considering the nature and purpose of the section and thus would include all modes and methods of transfer as were permissible and recognisable in law.  Merely because land was originally allotted by MIDC by way of a lease to the predecessor of assessee, who in turn had received the same by way of an assignment, that being one of the modes of transfer of land or building, the mere use of a particular mode of transfer could not create any exception vis-a-vis holding of land or building by assessee-. Court held that the manner in which a property was held would be immaterial, for the applicability of section 50C. Order of Tribunal affirmed. Atul G. Purani v.ITO (2011) 11 ITR 120 (Mum) (Trib.) considered. CIT v. Greenfield Hotels and Estates Pvt Ltd (2016) 389 ITR 68 (Bom)(HC), distinguished.  (AY. 2006-07)