9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n against the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, New Delhi passed in WP(C) No. 590 of 2016 and 405 of 2017 order dated 15.09.2017 in the case of Brahmparkash & Rajender Singh and Anr (Combined order in Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017 titled as Union of India and others vs. Hari Singh and others.) ii. That the appellant craves for the permission to add, delete or amend grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed the return of income on 15.11.2014 declaring an income of Rs. 10,91,840/- and agricultural income of Rs. 91,320/- and the same was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"). Later on the case of the assessee was select ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed the income of the assessee at Rs. 1,06,90,550/- u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.4.2016. Against the assessment order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 12.1.2018 has allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the impugned order, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and stated that since the Department has filed proposal for Review Petition against the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, New Delhi passed in WP(C) No. 590 of 2016 and 405 of 2017 order dated 15.09.2017 in the case of Brahmparkash & Rajender Singh and Anr (Combined order in Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017 titled as Union of India and others ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e vide para no. 5.5 to 5.17 at page no. 9 to 12 of the impugned order. For the sake of clarity, we are reproducing herewith the relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) as under:- 5.5 I have carefully considered the rival submissions, it is evident from the facts on record the submissions of the appellant and the report of the Assessing Officer that the appellant had received enhanced compensation and interest on enhanced compensation under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. The interest amount received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is Rs. 79,48,706/- on which TDS was deducted by the HSIIDC and which has been taxed by the Assessing Officer under the head capital gains. As discussed above, as the amount received by the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is in the nature of interest and is taxable. 5.9 The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed in the case of Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. CWP No. 15506 of 2013(as discussed in para 3.8 above) by way of Special Leave to Appeal (C No. 34642 of 2014 vide order dated 18.12. 2014 with the following order:- "Heard Ld. Counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material. We do not find any legal and valid grounds for interference. The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed. " 5.11 Further, on this issue, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana5.10 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court considered all the aforesaid cases, in the case of Sunder Lai & Anr. Vs. Unio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nion of India 2014 (2) PLR 662 and another judgment in Attar Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others, CWP No. 10125 of 2015 dated 3.9.2015 have reiterated the position of taxability on enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act on the basis of the amendment and the fact of inapplicability of Ghanshy ant's case (supra), after the amendment to the statute. The decisions already rendered by the Court were parentally wrong, failing to note of the statutory amendment and its effect on the awards in the two decisions, referred to above. 2. The orders already passed are recalled and the review applications are allowed holding that interest on the additional award is taxable under income tax and liable to be deducted at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing cases:- i. Mahinder Singh V/s ITO in ITA No. 5533/Del./2016 dated 09/06/2017 ii. Ajay Gupta V/s ITO in ITA No. 5937/Del./2016 dated 07/06/2017. iii) Babu Lai V/s ITO in ITA No. 6614/DeI./2016 dated 07/06/2017 5.16 Recently, the issue has once again been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 15/09/2017 in the case of Union of India V/s Hari Singh and Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017. In this decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "While determining as to whether the compensation paid was for agricultural land or not, the AOs will keep in mind the provisions of section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act and the law laid down by this court in commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad V. Ghan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
