9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the petitioner on that score - primary contention urged the petitioner is that the interest portion received by the petitioner following his land acquisition should be spread over from the year of acquisition till the year of payment HELD THAT:- We have to necessarily sustain the contention of the petitioner's counsel that even though a sum of ₹ 45,00,000/- was received as interest in the year 2006 for the assessment year 2007-2008, still it cannot be taxed as a single receipt and that the said amount should be spread over from the year of acquisition. We called upon the counsel on either side to file a memo of calculation to demonstrate if by such spreading over, whether the petitioner would be liable to pay any tax at all. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dents : Ms.Parameshwari for Mrs.S.Srimathy Standing Counsel ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2.The petitioner is owning lands in Virudhunagar, which was acquired for the Collectorate Complex of Virudhunagar District. The petitioner was granted compensation by the land acquisition officer. Aggrieved by the quantum awarded to him, the petitioner sought reference and enhancement of the compensation. The proceedings went on for number of years and ultimately only on 31.12.2006, the petitioner was disbursed with the compensation amount. It comprised not only enhanced compensation, but also solatium and interest. The authority, who had disbursed the com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility to tax is attracted viz the accrual of the income or its receipt. It is also evidenced from records that interest granted is for the period 21.09.1985 to 31.12.2006. However, this interest become due to the assessee only by the order dated 18.11.2002 of the Hon'ble High Court. From the affidavit filed it is gathered that though the order of the Hon'ble High Court was in the year 2002, the assessee filed execution petitions before Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar only in the year 2004, the acquisition authority filed calculation memo only in the year 2007 and the assessee also received the amunt within the financial year ending 31.03.2007. 5.1. The interest income which was neither received nor accrued in the relevant pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interest portion received by the petitioner following his land acquisition should be spread over from the year of acquisition till the year of payment. He also pointed out that during the relevant assessment year 2007-2008, the petitioner was not having any taxable liability. He also pointed out that for the said assessment year, he could have rightly shown only a sum of ₹ 1,45,000/- as interest received. This amount would not attract any tax liability. The main contention is that the assessing authority had never raised any demand in respect of the previous years. Till date, no notice has been received from the respondent and the petitioner's income for the earlier years had not been assessed to tax. Therefore, according to h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
