Occupation certificate not a must for deemed conveyance

How are feasibility report and conveyance related to redevelopment of society properties? Are occupation certificate and building plan necessary for deemed conveyance?
—Ashok Mhatre
It is desirable that feasibility of redevelopment of a property is determined before a society initiates the process of inviting a developer.

This includes verification of papers and documents including building plans of property, understanding the requirement of perfecting title of the property, estimation of available floor space index (FSI), premium FSI, transfer of development rights FSI, areas constructible by use of FSI and without FSI, etc.

A society which does not have conveyance would not be able to proceed on its own for redevelopment.

Conveyance executed and property cards not being in the name of society would not be a big issue as the same is an issue of
procedural compliances only.

It is quite possible that documents like occupation certificate, building plans and other papers and documents, which the builder is bound to provide to the society, have not been provided.
In the absence of such papers and documents also, the right to deemed conveyance cannot be denied by the competent authority.
In fact, deemed conveyance is the remedy provided inter alia for cases of non-cooperating landlords and builders and developers.

Therefore, once the titles of the flats purchasers are established, deemed conveyance would have to be granted.

Competent authority is an administrator of law and cannot provide for the requirements not stated in the law.

I have dividend income from shares and also have other business income and capital gains from sale of shares, some of which were purchased with borrowed funds. We also have to bear securities transaction tax. Some transactions were squared off without taking delivery. What will be the income tax implication?
— Meenakshi V
As far as shares purchased with borrowed funds are concerned, the same may give rise to business income.
Sale of other shares in delivery-based transactions may give rise to capital gains or business income depending upon the frequency of transactions, intention at the time of
purchase, treatment in books of account, disclosure in financial statements, etc.

As far as dividend income is concerned, the same is exempt, whether the shares are held as investments or stock in trade.
It is possible to take a view that borrowed funds utilised for dealing in shares should not attract disallowance on relevant interest although dividend income therefrom is tax-free because in such cases dividend income is incidental and the predominant activity is to earn from dealing in shares.

For the purposes of section 14A, which disallows expenditure incurred to earn tax-free income, all direct and indirect expenses, including administrative, rent etc would have to be considered and if nexus of some expenses  to dividend income is established,
the same would be disallowable.

Securities transaction tax suffered on purchase and sale of shares to the extent sales of such shares give rise to capital gains, would not be allowable as deduction.

Such tax paid for trading in shares would, however, be allowable as deduction from business income.  Transactions settled without actual delivery would be treated as speculation transactions.
The writer is a chartered accountant and can be reached at

ghiatarun@rediffmail.com