Agreement To Sell Evidence

4. We heard competing statements and examined the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the business appointments indicated there are not in dispute and are therefore not repeated for reasons of brevity. The expert`s application for an exemption from his capital gain, pursuant to section 54, paragraph 1, of the Act, was rejected by AO on the grounds that the notator had not purchased the dwelling within one year of the date of the sale of the former asset. In this case, the old house was transferred by the expert on 27.12.2011, when she had purchased a new apartment on 04.10.2010. Thus, the new asset was acquired more than a year before the date of the transaction for the old building. For this reason, the AO did not grant benefits and 54 of the law. On appeal, Ld. CIT (A) upheld the AO`s decision. Before us, the Ld.

AR argued that, under the provision in Section 2 (47) of the Act, which defines the term “transaction” which has been defined as inclusive, and according to that definition, if an asset right is in progress, such an extinction would involve the transfer of assets. He therefore argued that the execution of the sale agreement had terminated a right in favour of the purchaser of the property and a specific right concerning the former residence which the auditor had benefited from and that, therefore, the agreement of 16.09.2011 should have been considered the date of the transfer and not as the registration date of 27.12.2011 of the AO/Ld.CIT (A). For this proposal, the Ld. AR cited the supreme court decision of Sanjiv Lal in Civil Appeal No. 5899-5900 of 2014 (SC), which is placed from pages 1 to 16 of the paper book (PB). It is concluded that, on the basis of the above Hon`ble Courts, the unregord sale agreement was legitimized, since it could be admissible in a lawsuit for a defined benefit and be admissible in the evidence relating to Section 49 of the Registration Act. The non-registered sale agreement can form the basis of the legal action of a defined benefit and serve as evidence of the contractual agreement or partial performance of a contract. Section 53A should normally be used as a defence and not as a weapon when a defendant has the right to protect his property from the bearer or from his heir or his legal representative.

[Provided that an unregord document required by that Act or the Transfer of Ownership Act of 1882 (4 of 1882) may be obtained as evidence of a contract in a lawsuit for a chapter II defined benefit, if the Specific Relief Act, 1877 (3 of 1877), or as evidence of a security transaction that is not to be carried out with the registered deed.”