9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed and the ground on which revenue authorities have disallowed the claim being the assessee engaged in business is of no relevance. Thus, on the basis of the overriding provision of Section 56(2)(viii) read with Section 57(iv) of the Act, we agree that the assessee is entitled to the statutory deduction of 50% u/s 57(iv) of the Act. Hence we set aside the orders of the authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the Assessee. - ITA No. 3139/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2023 - SHRI SHAMIM , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri R. S. Singhavi , CA and Shri Satyajit Goel , CA For the Revenue : Shri Gurpreet Singh , Sr. DR ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA , A. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l disregard to scheme and intent of section 5 of Income tax Act, 1961 read with Article 265 of Constitution of India. 3. (i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the claim of 50% deduction to the extent of Rs. 37,37,662/- u/s 57(iv) in respect of interest on enhanced compensation of Rs. 74,75,323/- by re-characterising the same under the head Profit and Gains of Business Profession as against Income from Other Sources . (ii) That interest on enhanced compensation being specifically covered under section 56(2)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the same is assessable under the head Income from Other Sources and as such the claim of deduction u/s 57(iv) has wrongly been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v) of the Act is not admissible. 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the impugned disallowance of claim of deduction U/s 57(iv) is misconceived and without proper appreciation of the specific provision of Section 56(2)(viii) read with Section 57(iv) of the Act. 4.1 He further submitted that the facts that the assessee is engaged in the business of PGBP is neither relevant nor will override the specific provision of section 56(2) of the Act. Hence, he submitted that the deduction claim U/s 57(iv) is correct and the same is to be allowed. 5. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
