9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion can be traced in Sec. 119(2)(b) of the Act, the same too does not find favour with us. Where a remedy available to an assessee falls within the four corners of a specific statutory provision, then, the same cannot be declined to him, for the reason, that an alternative remedy is available elsewhere. Be that as it may, we are of a strong conviction that as the A.O remains under a statutory obligation to deduce the true income of an assessee, therefore, the entitlement of the assessee before us towards deduction u/s 57(iv), which is inextricably interwoven or in fact intertwined with the corresponding interest income which had duly been disclosed by him in his return of income, could not have been declined by the A.O on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act , for short) dated 14.05.2018 for A.Y 2012-13. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds before us : 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO rejecting the application filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Income Tax Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO rejecting the application filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Income Tax Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v) of the Act was entitled for a statutory deduction of fifty percent of the aforesaid interest income, however, having failed to raise such a claim in his return of income, the assessee holding a conviction that the omission on his part to claim the aforesaid statutory deduction was in the nature of a mistake apparent from record, rectifiable under Sec. 154 of the Act, thus, moved an application before the A.O under the aforesaid statutory provision. However, the A.O being of the view, that the aforesaid claim for deduction could have only been allowed if the same was raised by the assessee in his original/revised return of income, therefore, vide his order dated 16.02.2017 rejected the application of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompensation or enhanced compensation in itself vests the assessee with a statutory entitlement of a consequential claim for deduction under Sec. 57 (iv) of the Act. As such, the eligibility of an assessee for claim of deduction under the aforesaid statutory provision is not dependent on any documentary evidence/material, but is inextricably interlinked or in fact interwoven with the receipt of the interest on compensation or enhanced compensation by him. Now, in the case before us, it is a matter of fact borne from the record, that, the assessee had in his return of income for the year under consideration duly disclosed the interest income that was received by him on the compensation qua acquisition of his agricultural land by the Land Coll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remedy available to an assessee falls within the four corners of a specific statutory provision, then, the same cannot be declined to him, for the reason, that an alternative remedy is available elsewhere. Be that as it may, we are of a strong conviction that as the A.O remains under a statutory obligation to deduce the true income of an assessee, therefore, the entitlement of the assessee before us towards deduction u/s 57(iv), which is inextricably interwoven or in fact intertwined with the corresponding interest income which had duly been disclosed by him in his return of income, could not have been declined by the A.O on the basis of hyper technical reasons. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the Judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected the assessee s application u/s 154 of the Act. 9. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the view taken by the lower authorities that the omission on the part of the assessee to claim deduction u/s. 57(iv) in his return of income was not in the nature of a mistake rectifiable under Sec. 154 of the Act. We, thus, set-aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the A.O to allow the assessee s claim for deduction u/s. 57(iv) of the Act of ₹ 23,20,949/- i.e. @ 50% of the interest on compensation of ₹ 46,41,898/- that was disclosed by him in his return of income for the year under consideration. The Grounds of appeal Nos. 2 to 6 are allowed in terms of our aforesaid ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
