9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Admissibility of additional grounds before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). 2. Legality of capital gains tax levy for the assessment year 1970-71. 3. Taxability of interest received on enhanced compensation for the assessment year 1970-71. Summary: 1. Admissibility of Additional Grounds: The primary issue was whether the ITAT could permit the assessee to raise an additional ground regarding the levy of capital gains tax on a sum of Rs. 1,02,797, which was not disputed before the lower authorities. The court noted conflicting views among different High Courts and previous decisions of this court. The court referred to the Supreme Court's decisions in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC), CIT v. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. [1967] 66 ITR 710 (SC), and CIT v. S. Nelliappan [1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC), emphasizing that the Tribunal's jurisdiction is restricted to the subject-matter of the appeal. The court concluded that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain new grounds unrelated to the subject-matter of the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The court held that the Tribunal could not allow the assessee to dispute new items or entertain new claims for deduction for the first time. 2. Legality of Capital Gains Tax Levy: The second issue was whether the levy of capital gains tax on the amount of Rs. 1,02,797 for the assessment year 1970-71 was legal and valid. The court noted that the Tribunal had held that the capital gains were not assessable to tax for the year 1970-71 based on the decision of this court in S. Appala Narasamma v. CIT [1987] 168 ITR 17. However, given the court's conclusion on the first issue, it declined to answer this question, stating that the Tribunal could not have gone into the question of capital gains tax if it had no jurisdiction to entertain the additional ground. 3. Taxability of Interest on Enhanced Compensation: The third issue was whether the entirety of the interest of Rs. 72,026 received on the enhanced compensation was assessable for the assessment year 1970-71. The Division Bench had already answered this question in favor of the assessee, following the decision in CIT v. Smt. Sankari Manickyamma [1976] 105 ITR 172 (AP), holding that the interest should be spread over the period from the date of possession to the date of payment. The Full Bench reaffirmed this opinion, answering the question in the negative against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee. Conclusion: The court's comprehensive analysis led to the conclusion that the ITAT cannot entertain new grounds unrelated to the subject-matter of the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, thereby answering the first question in the negative. Consequently, the second question was not addressed. The third question was answered in favor of the assessee, reaffirming the Division Bench's decision.
|
