← All Phrases

“date of transfer”

Capital GainsSection 2(47)Section 2(47)965 judgments

The decision most relied on for date of transfer is CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini (398 ITR 531), cited in 228 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on date of transfer

CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini
398 ITR 531 · 2017 · Supreme Court
228
citing judgments

A transfer of immovable property, for the purpose of capital gains under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, occurs only when the agreement allowing possession in part performance of a contract is a registered instrument, as mandated by Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

Chaturbhuj Dwarkadas Kapadia v. CIT
260 ITR 491 · 2003 · High Court
150
citing judgments

For capital gains purposes, a 'transfer' under section 2(47)(v) occurs and capital gains arise in the year when possession of the property is handed over in part performance of a contract, such as a joint development agreement. This was the settled position before the specific provisions of section 45(5A) were introduced.

Sanjeev Lal v. CIT
365 ITR 389 · 2014 · Supreme Court
122
citing judgments

For claiming capital gains exemption under beneficial provisions like section 54, the 'date of transfer' can be the date of the agreement to sell, particularly when coupled with substantial advance consideration or an enforceable right, adopting a purposive and liberal interpretation to acknowledge the assessee's intent.

Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd. v. State of Haryana
340 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court
64
citing judgments

A transfer of immovable property by way of sale is legally valid only through a duly stamped and registered deed of conveyance. Unregistered instruments like agreements to sell, General Power of Attorney, or wills do not transfer title or create an interest in the property.

CIT v. T.K. Dayalu
202 Taxmann 531 · 2011 · High Court
58
citing judgments

In a Joint Development Agreement (JDA), capital gains arise for chargeability to tax when the complete control over the property is passed to the developer, with the date of such transfer of control being relevant for determining the assessment year. This includes considerations of possession under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

PCIT v. Swananda Properties (P.) Ltd.
111 Taxmann.com 94 · 2019 · High Court
50
citing judgments

Prior to the incorporation of the proviso to section 43CA(1) with effect from 1st April 2019, section 43CA did not envisage any limit regarding the difference between the stamp duty value and the actual sale consideration received by the assessee for the transfer of immovable property that was stock-in-trade.

CIT v. Ashaland Corporation
133 ITR 55 · 1982 · High Court
44
citing judgments

Income from the sale of immovable property, including any 'on-money' component, is taxable only when the sale is complete, marked by the execution and registration of the sale deed and/or transfer of possession to the buyer.

CIT v. R.L. Sood
245 ITR 727 · 2000 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Exemption under Section 54 for capital gains on a residential property is available even if the sale deed is not registered within the stipulated time, provided a substantial amount of consideration is paid, or the delay in completion/registration is beyond the assessee's control.

Judgments citing date of transfer

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Kuwait Investment Authority, Mumbai

ITA 476/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh Irani, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 154Section 2

that in the assessee's case, the period of holding of capital assets (ie listed shares) as on the date immediately preceding the date of transfer is exactly 12 months and hence the capital gain arising therefrom is liable to be treated as short term capital gain ... would reveal that the transfer or sale is treated as a cut off point, to apply the test. The expression 'immediately preceding the date of transfer' is a cut off point for determining and deciding the period during which the asset was held by an assessee. The said expression does

M/S. R.K. Investments, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1159/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1159/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. R.K. Investments Dcit Ground Floor, Block-Iv, Non-Corporate Circle-3(1) बनाम/ No.184-187,Temple Steps, Chennai. Vs. Anna Salai Little Mount, Chennai-600 015. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafr-3413-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 2(14)(lii)Section 263Section 45

assessee. It was evident that the land was not used for agricultural activities for the last two years prior to the date of transfer of land. The exemption was allowed to the extent of Rs.815.73 Lac without any supportive documents. Therefore, the exemption was to be disallowed and the income ... assessee. It was also observed that the land was not used for agricultural activities for the last two years prior to the date of transfer of land and the exemption was allowed without any supportive documents. Therefore, the deduction as claimed by the assessee was to be disallowed

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru vs. Alagappa Annamalai (HUF), Bengaluru

ITA 955/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Sri Alagappa Muthiah (Huf) 34, 8Th Main, 4Th Cross Rajamahal Vilas Extension Bangalore 560 080 Pan No : Aaана3885P Appellant

Section 131

transfer is completed only upon the receipt of possession and there is no justification to take the date of occupancy certificate as a date of transfer. Provisions of section 45[5A] inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01/04/2018 would not apply since the date of occupancy certificate is prior

Sri Alagappa Annamalai(HUF), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

ITA 776/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Sri Alagappa Muthiah (Huf) 34, 8Th Main, 4Th Cross Rajamahal Vilas Extension Bangalore 560 080 Pan No: Aaaha3885P Appellant

Section 131

transfer is completed only upon the receipt of possession and there is no justification to take the date of occupancy certificate as a date of transfer. Provisions of section 45[5A] inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01/04/2018 would not apply since the date of occupancy certificate is prior

Sri Alagappa Muthiah(HUF), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(4), Bangalore

ITA 775/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Sri Alagappa Muthiah (Huf) 34, 8Th Main, 4Th Cross Rajamahal Vilas Extension Bangalore 560 080 Pan No: Aaана3885P Appellant

Section 131

transfer is completed only upon the receipt of possession and there is no justification to take the date of occupancy certificate as a date of transfer. Provisions of section 45[5A] inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01/04/2018 would not apply since the date of occupancy certificate is prior

Chandra Bhavani Sankar, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 16(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.101/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Shri Chandra Bhavani Sankar, The Ito, 1/3A, Vinayakar Koil Street, Ncw-16(2), Thalambur, Chennai. Chennai-600 130. [Pan: Aeypb 1764 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayanan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 54(1)Section 54FSection 68

extended his old house by constructing first floor to the existing ground floor, which construction was started a year back before the date of transfer; and the AO noted that as per the provisions of Sec.54F of the Act, assessee could only have purchased a residential house one year before ... income of the previous year, if the assessee has within a period of one year before or two years after the date of transfer of that residential house, purchased another residential house in India or has within a period of three years Shri Chandra Bhavani Sankar :: 4 :: after the date

Base Realty Private Limited, Lower Parel, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan

In the result, appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1121/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 48

been claimed by the assessee company that it was legally bound to discharge the liability of such expenditure incurred after the date of transfer, obviously in a different financial year. On the other hand, the assessee company cannot keep aside the fact that any such claim of expenditure or deduction

Shri Jignesh Jaysukhlal Ghiya, Vadodara vs. The DCIT Cirlce-4(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 324/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

Shri Tushar Hemani appearing for the assessee submitted that construction of the new flat have been completed within three years (25.02.2014) from the date of transfer of original asset (09.01.2013). Thus assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 54 even in respect of investment made prior to the date of transfer ... purpose of claim of exemption u/s. 54 of the Act, so long as construction is completed within three years from the date of “transfer of original asset”. Further the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 54 of the Act even in respect of amount of investment in construction made prior

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Ketaben Janakbhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 103/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

taxpayer claims that the value assessed by the stamp valuation authority exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer. In the case of PCIT v. Ravjibhai Nagjibhai Thesia76 taxmann.com 76 (Gujarat), the High Court held that Assessing Officer is required to compute capital gain ... assessee objects before Assessing Officer that value adopted by stamp valuation authority under Section 50C(1) exceeds fair market value of property on date of transfer, Assessing Officer may either accept valuation of property on basis of report of approved valuer filed by assessee or he may refer question

Ramdas Sitaram Patil, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 621/PUN/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Ramdas Sitaram Patil, Vs. Acit, 238/2, Atharva Estate, Central Circle, E-Ward, Tarabai Park – 416 003 Kolhapur Kolhapur, Maharashtra Pan : Agupp5765D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

Settlement Commission. 6. Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered submission of appellant that flats which were not in existence as on the date of transfer of Original Asset No.1 forms part of sales consideration under Joint Development Agreement and the same should not be treated as investments in flats

Smart Information Worldwide Inc, Chennai vs. ACIT International Taxation 2(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 330/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Smart Information Worldwide Inc. Dcit बनाम/ 49 Sixth Main Road, International Taxation -2(2) Vs. Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-8497-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Ravichandran (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2024

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 48Section 50CSection 50D

could not be determined then for the purpose of computing capital gains, the fair market value of the said asset on the date of transfer shall be deemed to be the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. The assessee assailed the same ... purpose of computing income chargeable to tax as capital gains, the Fair Market Value (“FMV”) of the said asset on the date of transfer shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing upon such transfer. Upon careful perusal of the same, it could

Mahesh Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 936/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

utilized towards the new asset can be brought to tax in the previous year in which the period of three years from the date of transfer of original asset expires. 3.6 On the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, the disallowance of deduction under section

Mahesh Reddy, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-2, Bengaluru

ITA 1379/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Sri K.R. Pradeep, A.R. & Ms. Girija G.P., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Kiran D., D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

utilized towards the new asset can be brought to tax in the previous year in which the period of three years from the date of transfer of original asset expires. 3.6 On the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, the disallowance of deduction under section

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 255/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57Section 69ASection 80CSection 80D

clause (iii) of clause (14) of section 2; ii. such land, during the period of two years immediately preceding the date of transfer, was being used for agricultural purposes by such Hindu undivided family or individual or a parent of his; iii. such transfer is by way of compulsory acquisition

Pathfinder Publishing Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle -16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

amount set apart for payment of dividends on preference shares and equity shares where such dividends have not been declared before the date of transfer at general body meeting of the company; (iii) reserve and surplus, by whatever name called, even if the resulting figure is negative, other than those ... amount set apart for payment of dividends on preference shares and equity shares where such dividends have not been declared before the date of transfer at a general body meeting of the company; (iii) reserves and surplus, by whatever name called, even if the resulting figure is negative, other than

Shree Estates, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 469/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.469/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shree Estates Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 14(1) Pan:Adifs9997B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR)
Section 68

moment it is a transfer but for the purpose of computation of capital gain whether the fair market value as on the date of transfer needs to be taken as full value of the consideration or the amount of revaluation reserve credited to the partners account needs to be taken ... deemed to be a full value of the consideration. If we consider the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer, the market value of the property as per stamp duty authority was Rs.7 lakh per acre and if we consider the fair market value

Huntsman Investments (Netherlands), Mumbai vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle-2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4222/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234B

then, for the purpose of computing income chargeable to tax as capital gains, the fair market value of the said asset on the date of transfer shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer." The plain reading

Margi Joy Desi, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2377/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Saboo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath, Sr. DR
Section 54

that as per the provisions of section 54 the assessee should have completed the construction of the flat within three years from the date of transfer and that in assessee's case the construction was completed much after the period of three years. The AO also held that the date ... requirement is to invest in the construction of new house within a period of three years from the date of transfer of asset and that the said section does not talk about completion of construction. The ld. AR further submitted that the reasons quoted by the lower authorities that

Bhupendrabhai Punjabhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(3), Vadodara

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 655/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 655/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Bhupendrabhai Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Punjabhai Patel Income Tax Vs. Near Towers Dabhasa, Tal: Circle-1(3), Baroda Padra, Vadodara, Gujarat, 391440 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amgpp7772G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Sanjay R Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashesh Rajesh Revar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/07/2024 26/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 06.10.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal:

For Respondent: Shri Ashesh Rajesh Revar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

disallowed the claim for the reason that the construction of the house was not completed within the period of 3 years from the date of transfer of the original asset, on which the capital gain was derived by the assessee. In this case, the assessee had declared LTCG of Rs.12

Reji Krishnan, Trivandrum vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 267/COCH/2024[AY 2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Dr. Abhishek Murali, CAFor Respondent: Sri. Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 234Section 54F

shall apply where— (a) the assessee,— 5 Sri.Reji Krishnan. (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset; or (ii) purchases any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of one year after the date ... original asset; or (iii) constructs any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of three years after the date of transfer of the original asset; and….” 7. As seen from the above provision, in order to get the benefit u/s.54F of the Act, the assessee should have