9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GUJARAT HIGH COURT], Ramabai [1989 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT], Jagmal Singh .[2018 (9) TMI 1468 - ITAT DELHI], Sh. Amarchand Gupta [2019 (8) TMI 1424 - ITAT DELHI] and also the cases relied by the revenue viz. Jagmal Singh and Others [2016 (3) TMI 733 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT], Manjeet Singh Vs Union of India [2014 (12) TMI 1298 - SC ORDER]. We have also perused the judgment of Ghanshyam [2009 (7) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT] . The Hon'ble Apex Court held that 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 whereas interest u/s 34 is for delay in making payment. Interest u/s 28 is a part of the enhanced value. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as on the facts of the appellant's case." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed exempt income of Rs. 1,84,09,546/- received from State Government DRO-cumLAC. The AO noted that the assessee had received interest on enhanced compensation amounting to Rs. 1,84,09,546/-. The A.O held that interest on enhanced compensation is taxable u/s 56(2)(viii) and after allowing a deduction of sum equal to 50% of interest received, as per the provisions of Section 57(1)(v) remaining amount of Rs. 94,11,070/- was added to the total income of the assessee. 4. Background of this case is that the agricultural land of the assessee was acquired by Haryana State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (HS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TO 70 taxmann 45, Ramabai Vs CIT 181 ITR 400(SC), order of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Jagmal Singh in ITA No. 2340/Del/2018, Sh. Amarchand Gupta 5367/Del/2018 and also the cases relied by the revenue viz. Jagmal Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana, Manjeet Singh Vs Union of India (SC). We have also perused the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Ghanshyam (HUF). The Hon'ble Apex Court held that 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 whereas interest u/s 34 is for delay in making payment. Interest u/s 28 is a part of the enhanced value. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that interest u/s 34 is only for delay in making payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
