Validity and Deadline Control — Occupancy Permit Status
An occupancy permit (yapı kullanma izin belgesi, commonly called iskan) records an administrative conclusion about a completed building or relevant part of it at the time the permit is issued. For a property transaction, the important question is not simply whether an old permit exists. The file must show that the permit relates to the same building and independent section, that later construction or permit amendments have not made the old evidence misleading, and that the title and building records are consistent with the current physical situation.
What 'validity' means in practice
An occupancy permit is not normally treated like a passport with a routine expiration date. The freshness problem arises because the property can change after issuance. Additions, enclosure of balconies, merging or splitting spaces, changes of use, extra floors, major common-area works or later amendments to the building permit can create a gap between the approved situation and what exists on site. A due-diligence file should therefore distinguish the date the permit was issued from the date on which its continuing relevance was last checked.
First identify the issuing authority, building permit reference, parcel, building, scope and date. Then compare those identifiers with the current cadastral and title information and with the independent section being purchased. Where the permit covers an entire building, do not assume that every commercial or sales description used today corresponds automatically to the approved and registered unit. The transaction file should document the chain from parcel and building to the specific unit.
Relationship with condominium title
TKGM explains that where a building subject to construction servitude (kat irtifakı) has obtained an occupancy permit, conversion to condominium ownership (kat mülkiyeti) can be carried out ex officio following an owner's application or transmission of the permit by the competent authority. TKGM also states that the occupancy permit is relevant to establishing condominium ownership for completed buildings. This makes the current title type an important cross-check: a long-standing discrepancy between an apparently completed, occupied building and the registration status deserves explanation rather than an assumption.
The existence of kat mülkiyeti is useful evidence, but it should not be used to ignore visible later alterations. Conversely, kat irtifakı does not by itself prove that a building has no occupancy permit, because administrative transmission and registration processes can have their own history. Check the competent municipality or public authority when the issue is material, and retain the response or current record instead of relying on a broker's statement.
Deadlines and the sixty-day reference
Older TKGM guidance discusses the statutory duty for the authority issuing a yapı kullanma izin belgesi to send the relevant documentation to the land registry within sixty days for ex officio conversion procedures. TKGM's 2017 interpretation states that this sixty-day period is directed to the administration and is not a forfeiture period that permanently prevents conversion after it has passed. That distinction is important: a missed administrative transmission window should not be described to a buyer as if the permit itself automatically became invalid on day sixty-one.
For transaction control, dates should nevertheless be recorded carefully. Keep the issuance date, any amendment date, the date the document was obtained for the file, and the date of the latest official recheck. If a seller provides a very old scan while building works or plan changes have occurred since then, request updated confirmation. The age of the copy is a trigger for revalidation, not proof of invalidity.
Red flags that require a fresh check
A fresh authority check is especially appropriate when the physical unit differs from the approved plan, when common areas have been enclosed or converted, when use appears different from the registered purpose, when construction continued after the permit date, when a building has unresolved municipal enforcement, or when title information does not align with the building's current configuration. The review should separate minor maintenance from changes that may affect planning, licensing or registration.
Do not try to cure a mismatch by editing the property description in the contract. Instead, identify the precise issue and the authority or professional evidence needed to close it. A buyer should know whether the problem concerns an outdated copy, a later lawful amendment, an unregistered alteration, a title-conversion step, or a materially unresolved compliance question.
Closing evidence
Before closing, save the permit or official confirmation used, the related building-permit and parcel references, the title type, and any documents explaining later changes. Record who checked the information and when. If a municipality or other competent authority provides a current electronic result, preserve the transaction-specific reference or output where permitted.
A sound validity-and-deadline control therefore avoids two opposite mistakes: treating an old permit as eternally sufficient regardless of later changes, and treating an old date as proof that the permit has expired. The correct conclusion comes from matching the original administrative authorization to the current registered and physical state, with dates used to decide when a fresh official check is necessary.