9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him on the relevant valuation dates for the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the right to claim additional compensation was only a right in the nature of a right to sue and hence could not be considered as an item of asset held by the assessee on the relevant valuation dates ? " The only point that arises for consideration is whether or not extra compensation awarded by the civil court in a land acquisition case would constitute the value of the asset for the purpose of section 7(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. This question is no more res integra in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Pandit Lakshmi Kant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case [1980] 122 ITR 21 (SC), while reiterating the above proposition of law, the Supreme Court has further held as follows (p. 32): " The claimant can litigate the correctness of the award because his right to compensation is not fully redeemed but remains alive which he prosecutes in a civil court. That is why when a claimant dies in a pending reference, his heirs are brought on record and are permitted to prosecute the reference. This, however, does not mean that the civil court's evaluation of this right done subsequently would be its valuation as at the relevant date either under the Estate Duty Act or the Wealth-tax Act. It will be the duty of the assessing authority under either of the enactments to evaluate this property (right to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The first contention of the counsel for the appellant, therefore, fails." The Supreme Court, while laying down the above principle, has quoted with approval the following passage from the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court (see [1973] 90 ITR 47,62) which was the subject matter of appeal before the Supreme Court (p. 31): "The right to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government, at their market value on the date of acquisition is one and indivisible right. There is no right to 'receive compensation' and a separate right to receive I extra compensation'. The only right is to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government, which is the fair market value on the date of acquisition . The argument of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sets, the authority should deduct the expenditure the assessee had to meet to get the additional compensation. Relying on the above rulings of the Supreme Court, the counsel for the Revenue submitted that the additional compensation of Rs. 94,329 awarded by the Additional Subordinate judge also would form part of the value of the assets at the relevant valuation dates. We are of the view that it is so. But the entire amount of Rs. 94,329 cannot be said to form part of the value of the assets for the purpose of section 7(1) of the Wealthtax Act in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Khorshed Shapoor Chenai's case [1980] 122 ITR 21. The litigation hazards and such other incidental costs the assessee had to incur to get the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
