9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res-integra and the said issue is well settled in several decisions. In the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [ 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Canara Bank Securities Ltd. [ 2019 (10) TMI 1512 - SC ORDER] dismissed the Department s appeal affirming the view taken by the Bombay High Court [ 2019 (2) TMI 2020 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein the High Court held that the question whether the income should be taxed as business income or has arisen from other source was a debatable issue and the Assessing Officer had taken the plausible view that it was a business income after due enquiries and therefore not open for the Commissioner to take such an order in revision. Even in the present case, whether the receipt of interest related to the additional compensation granted under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is a part of exempt u/s 10 (37) of the Act or not is a debatable issue, therefore, following the ratio laid down in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [ 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] and other decisions mentioned above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order of the Ld. PCIT is found to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present Appeal on the Grounds mentioned above. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the receipt of interest related to the additional compensation u/s 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act has been duly declared exempt income by the assessee in the return filed on 11/08/2018, therefore, it cannot be construed that such income was undisclosed by the assessee. Further submitted that, the amount in question being additional compensation falls u/s 23(1A) of the Act, the position of law that any amount so received under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 may be assigned u/s 28 of the Act for interest, is not interest simplicitor but is in the nature of capital, relating as it does to the root of the Compensation as originally granted. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1(S.C), and the case of Union of India Vs. Hari Singh. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the said issue of exemption of interest u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been considered by the A.O. and relying on the various judicial precedents not made any addition. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s by Landowners, the Hon'ble Supreme Court determined the compensation along with the statutory benefits as provided under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The assessee was also awarded enhanced compensation by the Hon'ble High Court in RFA No.311 of 2012 (O M) order dated 24-05-2016 relying on the Supreme Court decision in Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017 (Union of India and ORS vs. Hari Singh and others) order and judgment dated 15.09.2017 holding that the claimants whose land was situated in village Om Nagar Budhera were found entitled to a compensation of Rs. 2,38,00,000/- per acre': Accordingly, the assessee has received enhanced compensation including interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 during F.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has received interest u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act of Rs. 1,86,42.032/- on which TDS of Rs. 18,64,203/- was deducted. Copy of Form D, copy of certificate confirming acquisition of land of assessee and copy of judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 24.05.2016 are enclosed. 4.2. The enhanced compensation awarded by the appellate authority/court to an assessee on acquisition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of nine per centum per annum from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess Into Court. The award of interest under section 28 of the 1894 Act is discretionary and is determined by the Court. Section 28 applies when the amount of original compensation has been paid or deposited and when the Court awards excess compensation. Section 28 empowers the Court to award interest on the excess amount of compensation awarded by it over the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector along with the additional amount u/s 23(1A) and solatium u/ 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, forming part of enhanced compensation. Interest paid on the excess amount under section 28 of the 1894 Act depends upon a claim by the person whose land is acquired, and quantum of interest was determined by the Court. Thus, interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is awarded by the discretionary power of the Court for accretion in the value of the lands, hence, it i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer has conducted an elaborate enquiry and adopted one of the two views which was plausible view. The question would be as to whether in such circumstances the power u/s 263 of the Act would be invoked or not. The above said question is no longer res-integra and the said issue is well settled in several decisions. In the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC). The Hon ble Supreme Court held as follows :- The phrase prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. For example, when an Income-tax Officer adopted one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of Revenue ; or where two views are possible and the Income-tax Officer has taken one view which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, unless the view taken by the Income-tax Officer is unsustainable in law. 13. Further, the Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
