If a seller holds unwavering shares in the same property (for example. B land ownership and a rental contract at the head, professional rental contracts were granted on the basis of the head rental contract) and chose the property during its ownership, can only the sale of the head rental contract be a TOGC or could it be said by the land ownership? However, this does not necessarily mean that all undersalt/co-off scenarios are automatically out of TOGC processing. What if, for example, A negotiated the sale to a potential developer (B) who, before entering into a sales contract with A, would enter into a lease agreement (AfL) with a potential tenant (T) who depended on the B acquisition of the property and the development works? B could then resell the property for the benefit of the AfL to a third-party financier (C) who undertakes to conclude the lease envisaged by the AfL. Once a lease has been assigned to a tenant, the operation can be considered to be in operation. If a formal lease has been granted to a tenant but has not yet occupied the building, the sale of the property would still be the transfer of a real estate rental company and a TOGC for VAT purposes. Even if the tenants have not actually signed the lease, as long as it is a signed lease or a rental agreement that is also transferred, the transfer could be a TOGC. The conditionality of the lease did not matter, as the contract became unconditional by exchanging sales contracts, that is, before the property was transferred to the university once concluded. If the university had not finished, BAPM would still have forced Coleridge to grant the lease. The most common situation is when the owner of the property or estate or his interest in a property currently leased to tenants sells or expropriates and the benefit of the lease or leases is transferred to the buyer. .