9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SHRI. N. K. SAINI , VP And SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA , JM For the Appellant : Neelam Dhiman , C.A. For the Respondents : Manveet Singh Sehgal , Sr. D. R. ORDER Per N. K. Saini , Vice President This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dt. 26/08/2021 of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: 1. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is against the law and facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming action of Learned A.O. passing the order u/s. 250 as AO has passed order after more than time prescribed u/s. 153(2). The notice u/s. 148 was issued on 17.05.2018 and order must be passed by 30.09.2019. It is submitted that the order ought to have been passed within statutory period and failing which order passed is time barred and hence bad in law and void ab initio. It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Income Tax Officer requires to be quashed. It be so done. 3. That it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Ghanshyam Dass HUF that interest awarded u/s. 28 of the Land Acquisitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who sustained the addition by observing in para 6.1 of the impugned order as under: 6.1 After considering the submission of the appellant, I do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. AO. In Para 4.8 the Ld. AO has also placed reliance on the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Punjab Haryana in the case of Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India Others in CWP No. 155506 of 2014, Puneet Singh Vs. Commission of Income Tax, Karnal In ITA 132-2018 (O M) vide judgment dated 19.11.2018 Naresh Kumar Jain Others Vs. State of Haryana Others reported as (2017) 188 PLR 193 has held that the interest component on enhanced compensation under section 28 is liable to be taxed u/s. 56 of the IT Act, 1961. In view of the above, no interference is called for with the addition made by the Ld. AO and addition is hereby confirmed. 5. Now the assessee is in appeal. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee furnished the written submissions which read as under: Re: Sawarn Singh S/o. Sh. Niranjan Singh Ref: ITA No. 264/CHD/2021 arising from the Order dated 26.08.2021 of N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deducted by the payer. Payer is assessee in default and department can easily recover it from deductor HUDA. In any case if it is taxable then assessee should be asked to pay only tax amount and interest should be recovered from payer. 6. My relative Ujjagar Singh got interest in crores for same land compensation and case is decided in his favour. Only because his case was decided by Panchkula Authorities in 2018-19 and my case is decided against me as it is decided in 2019-20. Copy of his judgment and D form is enclosed as proof. When everything is same then please do not discriminate on the basis of date of decision. Compilation of Latest Judgment given by ITAT Chandigarh regarding similar cases decided in 2021 are enclosed. Prayer It, is therefore, prayed that the additions made by AO and confirmed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) be deleted. Sd/- CA Neelam Dhiman Counsel of the Assessee 7. It was further submitted that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT, Chandigarh Bench A , Chandigarh in ITA No. 63 64/Chd/2020 in the case of ITO, Ward-1, Panchkula Vs. Smt. Chawli Devi, Vill-Ramgarh, P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra) or is to be taxed on the basis of apportionment for each year from the date of acquisition of lands till the receipt of the compensation in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rama Bai (supra); the second issue involved is as to whether the interest awarded u/s. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on enhanced compensation is to be treated as part of the enhanced compensation and will not be taxable separately as interest income under the Head 'income from other sources'? 8. We find that both these issues are covered by the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra) holding the same to be in the nature of compensation itself. The Court also dealt with the other aspect namely, the year of tax and answered this question by holding that it has to be tested on receipt basis, which means it would be taxed in the year in which it is received. The said findings given in the case of Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra) have been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Govindbhai Mamaiya (supra) observing as under: In so far as the second question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 34 is not treated as a part of income subject to tax, the interest earned under Section 28, which is on enhanced compensation, is treated as a accretion to the value and therefore, part of the enhanced compensation or consideration making it exigible to tax. After holding that interest on enhanced compensation under Section 28 of 1894 Act is taxable, the court dealt with the other aspect namely, the year of tax and answered this question by holding that it has to be tested on receipt basis, which means it would be taxed in the year in which it is received. It would mean that converse position i.e. spread over of this interest on accrual basis is not permissible. 9. The Ld. counsels for assessee has further brought our attention the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chet Ram (HUF) dated 12.9.2017 in Civil Appeal No. 13053/2017 wherein also the Hon'ble Supreme Court has again reiterated the proposition laid down in the case of Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra), which we find has been further reiterated in the case of Union of India vs. Hari Singh others in Civil Appeal No. 1504 of 2017 dated 15.9.2017, as under: (2) While dete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
