← 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

Simens Healthcase Diagnostics Limited ( Through Successor in Interest Siemens Limited ), Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT, Vadodara-2, Vadodara

ITA 1442/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1442/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09) Simens Healthcare The Principal बनाम/ Diagnostics Limited Commissioner Of Income Vs. (Through Successor In Tax Interest Siemens Limited) Vadodara-2 Birla Aurora, Level 21, Plot No. 1080, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai - 400030 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb8542M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jet Kamar, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 14/03/2024 03/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.03.2015 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vadodara-2 (‘Pcit’), Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As To ‘The Act’), Whereby & Whereunder The Assessment Order Dated 23.10.2012 Passed By The Acit, Circle-4, Baroda (In Short ‘Ao’) Has Been Directed To

For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 40A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Ashok Ganeshlal Mundra, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3866/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Ashok Ganeshlal Mundra Vs. Asst. Dir. Of I. Tax Cpc 601, A Wing, Hansa C.H.S (Jao: Ward Mum-W - Ltd. Behind Rameshwar 331(1), Ito, Ward 3(1)(1) Mandir, Jogeshwari (East) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mumbai – 400 060 Road, Mumbai- 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Abbpm0548H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ajay Singh & Akshay Pawar Respondent By : Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Of Hearing 05.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.03.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 22.09.2023 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “I. Denial Of Exemption Of Rs.47,18,400/- Claimed U/S 54Ec Of The Act, In Respect Of Investment In Capital Gains Bonds: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. C.I.T. (Appeals) Nfac, Erred In Upholding The Order Dt 29-01-2020 Passed U/S 154 By Adit, Cpc Denying The Relief For Exemption Of Rs.47,13,400 U/S 54Ec For Investment Of Rs. 50 Lakhs In Capital Gains Rec Bonds. 2. The Id. Cit. (Appeals) Failed To Appreciate & Consider That The Exemption Was Claimed U/S 54 Ec Of The Act, However The Same Was Not Reflected In Itr-3 Of Cpa Due To Technical Snag Which Is To Be Resolved By Dit (Systems). 3. Without Prejudice The Appellate Authority Ought To Have Considered The Claim On Its Own Merits, When Details Of Investment Made In Rec Bonds Were On Record Ii. Set-Off Of Short Term Capital Loss Against Long Term Capital Gains:

For Appellant: Ajay Singh &For Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 115BSection 154Section 54Section 54ESection 80T

return of income under the head information about deduction claimed at page no. 34 of the paper book, the assessee has shown the date of transfer of original asset on 28.06.2017 and also mentioned that Rs.50 lacs was invested in the specified bonds on 10.08.2017, therefore, deduction of Rs.47