9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 28.08.2024, for assessment year 2019-20. 2. Shri M.R. Sahu, appearing on behalf of the assessee has assailed impugned order on two counts i.e. (i) assailing validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act, and (ii) on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act was passed on 13.04.2023 and on the same date notice u/s. 148 was issued to the assessee. As per the provisions of section 149(1) of the Act, the time available to the assessee for issuance of notice u/s. 148 was up to 04.04.2023. Thus, the notice u/s. 148 of the Act issued on 13.04.2023 is time barred. Hence, proceedings arising there from are also vitiated. 3.1. On merits of the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been decide by Hon'ble Apex Court there is no element of doubt that interest received on enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not liable to be taxed. 4. Per contra, Shri Rajesh Tiwari representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. He submitted that the provisions of section 56(2) of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prior to insertion of aforesaid clause, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Ghanshyam HUF (supra) has held that interest received on compensation/enhanced compensation is part of solatium paid for compulsory acquisition of land, hence, exigible to tax u/s. 45(5) of the Act. The Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Mahender Pal Narang vs CBDT (supra) after consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
