9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the return itself being amount of enhances compensation in respect of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land which was exempt u/s 10 sub Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. A.O by placing reliance on judgment of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India, CWP No. 15506/2013 held that, the interest of Rs. 5,39,56,851/- to be in income taxable as per Section 56(2) (viii) of the Act and after allowing 50% deduction u/s 56(iv) of the Act added a sum of Rs. 2,69,78,425/- to the taxable income of the assessee and passed an assessment order on 20/03/2018. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 20/03/2018, the assessee has preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) has allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Manjeet Singh HUF Vs CIT of CWP No 15506 of 2013 dated 14.01.2014, Naresh Kumar Jain and others Vs State of Haryana and others of CWP No 14728 of 2017 dated 12/07/2017 and Puneet Singh Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal in ITA-132-2018 (O&M) dated 19.11.2018. Further submitted that, the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has clearly stated that/interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is taxable u/s 56(2)(viii) r.w.s. 57(iv) and 145A of the Income Tax Act, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law by treating interest received u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as non taxable. 6. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the interest received u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam HUF 315 ITR 1 held that the interest paid on the excess amount u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, depends upon a claim by the person whose land is acquired, where as interest u/s 34 of Land Acquisition Act is for delay in making payment. Interest u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act is a part of enhanced value of land which is not the case in the matter of payment of interest u/s 34 of the Land Acquisition Act. The relevant portions of the Judgment of the Apex Court are hereunder:- "In addition to the market value of the land, the Court shall in every case award a sum of 30 per cent on such market value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of acquisition. This is under section 23(2) of the 1894 Act. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compensation or not." 10. The Ld.CIT(A) has considered all the judgments mentioned in the present grounds of Appeal and since the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hari Singh & Ors (Supra) and also in the case of Ghanshyam HUF (Supra) are binding precedents, relied on the same. 11. In our considered opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) has committed no error and there is no infirmity in allowing the Appeal of the assessee. We are also of the view that the judgment rendered in the case of Ghanshyam HUF and Hari Singh (Supra) of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are applicable to the present case having binding effect over the High Court Judgments relied by the Revenue. Therefore, the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue are dismissed. 12. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
