#property transaction

The Madhya Pradesh High Court struck down a revenue authority's demand that land sellers must buy replacement property before completing a sale, ruling it renders the permission illusory and violates Article 14. This sets a critical limit on administrative discretion in land transactions, protecting financially distressed owners from coercive, impractical conditions that defeat the very purpose of seeking permission.

ITAT Delhi rules that unrecorded cash ('on money') received in property transactions forms part of the sale consideration and must be taxed under Capital Gains, not Section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The ruling clarifies the tax treatment of informal payments in real estate deals, impacting taxpayers and tax authorities alike.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that for TDS under Section 194-IA, the Rs. 50 lakh threshold is calculated per co-owner, not the total property value. This interpretation prevents unjust TDS liability for buyers of jointly owned properties, offering relief to taxpayers in multi-owner transactions.

The Jharkhand High Court ruled that a property purchaser cannot be held liable under Sections 420 or 406 IPC if there is no allegation of deception, forgery, or entrustment. The decision clarifies that criminal liability requires active dishonest intent, not merely purchasing from a non-owner, protecting bona fide buyers from frivolous criminal proceedings.

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench reinforces Lalita Kumari guidelines, holding that police cannot convert a civil property dispute into a criminal inquiry merely because a sale deed exists. The court quashed police summons where no cognizable offence was disclosed, even after a five-year delay in complaint filing.