If the expert converted his land into equity negotiation and entered into a development contract with the developer for the construction of a residential building, the capital gain from converting land into buildings and trading in previous years, during which the share of persons noted in real estate land was sold or retained for personal use by a company evaluable in accordance with the construction agreement, and the corresponding incomes should be properly taxed. Hon`ble ITAT Hyderabad Bank `B` in the case of Adhinarayana Reddy Kummeta/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -11 (1), Hyderabad 2018 (4) TMI 37 – ITAT HYDERABAD stated, however, that Section 45 (5A) could not be applied as a material provision to the previous development agreement, which is certainly drawn to Section 2.47).v). (vi) any transaction (through the accession or acquisition of shares in a cooperative, company or other group of persons, either by agreement or by other means) that results in the transfer or enjoyment of a property. In summary, the new Section 45 (5A) has set, among other things, the tax eligibility year for the capital gain, regardless of the year of the transfer of assets (in the form of real estate) u/s 2 (47) of the law; and also removed subjectivity in the assessment of the non-monetary consideration that was received/accumulated as a result of the transfer under the development agreement. Section 50C being a legal fiction, its scope and scope are limited to what is stated in the provision. Therefore, this provision can only be invoked if land or buildings or both are transferred. Their establishment may not be extended to other evaluators, nor to other characteristics, nor to circumstances other than those indicated. It was also decided that Section 50C can be invoked when development rights are transferred at the same time as the transfer of the land. We can see that there is a recorded act of transmission.
The additional fees would make no difference. As long as the condition under section 50C. That is to say that the transfer instrument registered with respect to the property is another event or an additional transfer or rights or commitments would be below Arif Akhatar Hussain v. ITO [2010 (12) TMI 91 – ITAT 91 – ITAT, MUMBAI] The property was ceded for the execution of the work by the developer and there was no document other than the development contract that transfers the title to the property to the developer. In the absence of transfer of ownership and consideration on the date of the development contract, the surrender of the property was only a temporary measure of construction work by the developer, and the exclusive ownership of the property in the legal sense of the contract remained due to the auditor, who was ultimately handed over at the time of the completion of the agreement to sell the dwellings by the auditor. The expert carried out all the sales work for the transfer of the built dwellings to the user/buyer, so that the transfer of the land on a pro-rata basis took place only when the expert transferred the land through sales work and offered the operating products accepted by the department.