Ruling on increasing the price in exchange for a deferred payment

Question:
If a man has goods, and some people ask him to sell them to them for more than their current price, with a known deferred payment, what is the legal ruling in that?

Answer:
It is permissible according to the majority of scholars; based on the saying of Allah, the Exalted: [Surat al-Baqarah: 282], the verse. And He, the Exalted, did not stipulate that the credit transaction be at the current market price.
And based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when he arrived in Medina and its people were selling fruits on credit for one or two years: . It is agreed upon that it is authentic.
And he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not stipulate that it be at the current market price.
Al-Hakim and al-Bayhaqi narrated with a good chain, from Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As (may Allah be pleased with them both): , and the evidence in this meaning is abundant.
And because the matter of trade in credit transactions does not function except on that basis; because a merchant generally cannot sell goods on credit at the current market price; because that would subject him to many losses; and because the seller benefits from the profit, and the buyer benefits from the delay and facilitation; since not everyone is able to buy their needs at the current price. If the increase in credit transactions were prohibited, it would result in harm to the community. The complete Shari'ah came to achieve and perfect benefits, and to nullify and reduce harms. I do not know of any significant disagreement in this issue; rather, what is known in the words of the scholars is permissibility and lawfulness. This is in the case where the purchase is for the need of use and benefit.
As for if the buyer purchases the goods on credit in order to sell them for cash; due to his need for cash to pay off a debt, or to build a residence, or for marriage, or the like, then if this transaction is from the buyer with this intention, there is disagreement among the scholars regarding its permissibility. It is called by the jurists (the issue of tawarruq), and some of the general public call it (al-wa'dah).
The stronger position in it is permissibility, and that is what we issue fatwas with; due to the generality of the previous evidence; and because the original ruling in transactions is permissibility and lawfulness, except for what is specifically prohibited by evidence; and because the need calls for it often; because the one in need—generally—does not find anyone to help him meet his need through donation or loan. So at that time, his need for this transaction becomes intense; so that he may be relieved from what has become difficult for him in paying off a debt or the like.
But if a Muslim can do without it, and be economical in everything he needs until Allah brings relief from Him, that is better and safer.
And what should be noted is: that it is not permissible for the seller to sell goods that are not in his possession, but are still in the possession of the merchants until he transfers them to his house, or to the market, or the like; because it is established in the authentic hadith from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) who said: Narrated by al-Bukhari.
And from Zayd ibn Thabit (may Allah be pleased with him) he said: Narrated by Ahmad and Abu Dawud, and authenticated by Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim.
And from Hakim ibn Hizam (may Allah be pleased with him) he said: I said: O Messenger of Allah, a man comes to me wanting a commodity that is not with me, should I sell it to him, then go and buy it? He said (peace and blessings be upon him): Narrated by Ahmad, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah with an authentic chain.