Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT
These appeals by the different assessees are directed against the separate orders each dated 13/06/2019 of Ld. CIT(A) , Patiala.
Since the issues involved are common in both these appeals which were heard together so these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
At the first instance we will deal with the appeal in ITA No. 1182/Chd/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 wherein assessee has raised the following grounds:
The impugned order is both against facts and erroneous in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in having held that section 24 of the Acquisition Act, 2013, is not made applicable to the acquisition made under the NH Act, 1956. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in having held that taking the logic further section 96 of the Land Acquisition Act which exempts the compensation from Income-tax, is also not applicable to the land acquisition covered by NH Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in having not rebutted the submissions of the assesee while giving finding merely relying on judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in having confirmed the order u/s 154 passed by the Ld. A.O. in not allowing the exemption from capital gains on compulsory acquisition of assessee’s land. The assessee craves leave to add to alter or amend the above grounds of appeal before the same is heard or disposed of. 4. The main grievance of the assessee relates to the exemption from the Income Tax of the compensation received on acquisition of land.
Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30/11/2015 declaring an income of Rs. 1,59,97,586/- after deduction under Chapter-VIA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) plus agriculture income of Rs. 50,000/- and exempt income of Rs. 21,858/- under section 10 of the Act. The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 14/12/2015. Thereafter the Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an application under section 154 of the Act on 03/01/2018 stating therein that the assessee had received compensation, under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTALARR Act, 2013)which was exempted under section 96 of the said Act. In the original return of income this compensation received was considered as taxable under Short Term Capital Gain & Long Term Capital Gain, but now it has been taken as exempt as per the Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25/12/2016 issued by the CBDT. The assessee furnished a copy of the said Circular, original ITR and computation of income for the year under consideration as well as rectified computation of income also with proof of payment for compensation made by the District Magistrate-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Sangrur. The details of the total income computed as per original ITR and as per rectified computation were as under:
Sr. No. Particulars Original ITR & Computation Rectified Computation 1. Assessment Year 2015-16 2015-16 2. ITR Original No Revised Return filed by the assessee. 3. Income from House Properly Rs. 1,77,870/- Rs. 1,77,870/- 4. Income from Capital gain STCG Rs. 2,09,108/- - LTCG Rs. 1,54,29,120/- - 5. Income from other sources Rs. 1,81,488/- Rs. 1,81,488/- 6. Gross Total Income Rs. 1,59,97,586/- Rs. 3,59,358/- 7. Deductions (Chapter VI-A) Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- 8. Total Income Rs. 1,59,87,586/- Rs. 3,49,358/- 9. Agriculture Income Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 50,000/- 10. Income Exempt u/s 10 Rs. 21,858/- Rs. 21,858/-
5.1 The A.O. observed that during the year under consideration the assessee had received compensation for compulsory acquisition of his Agriculture and Commercial land as under:
Sr. Certificate’s Nature of Date of Receipt Total TDS Net No. No. & Date Land of Compensation Deducted Compensation compensation (Rs.) (Rs.) received (Rs.) 1. 322 Agriculture 05.11.2014 2,68,676/- - 2,68,676/- 19.10.2015 Land 2. 245 Commercial 23.01.2015 1,54,53,202/- 15,45,320/- 1,39,07,882/- 10.07.2015 Land
5.2 The assessee appended note to the aforesaid details of the compensation received as under:
Note: As per certificate from the O/o the Collector Land Acquisition-cum-S.D.M. Sangrur, the above said Agriculture and Commercial Land had been acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer for Road No. NH-64 and vide the Notification No. S.O. 42/C.A.2/1899/S.9/2/2008 Dated 09.02.2008 of the Punjab Govt., the amount equilent to this Award of compensation for purchase of Commercial land will be exempted from Stamp Duty and Registration Charges.
5.3 The A.O. observed that the assessee claimed credit for TDS amounting to Rs. 15,87,848/- corresponding to the interest income declared in the return and the compensation received. The case was processed under section 143(1) of the Act as such, thus, as on date the returned income stands to be assessed income and there was no mistake which was self evident and apparent from the record warranting rectification thereof. He also observed that what the assessee wants to do was to make a fresh claim on the basis of fresh material which was not permissible under section 154 of the Act because the assessee had neither claimed the relevant relief in his original return nor any return had been revised to this effect as per the relevant provisions of the
law. He further observed that no addition, deduction or exemption could be claimed in the rectification request. He accordingly rejected the application moved under section 154 of the Act. The A.O. also observed that the assessee himself had not brought any mistake to the notice of the A.O. and the rectification application under section 154 of the Act by the representative of the assessee was nonest in the eyes of the law.
Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted as under:
"For the sake of facility we beg to make the following written submissions which may kindly be considered while disposing of the appeal noted in the subject.
The basic facts in brief are that the appellant is an individual earning income from House Property, Capital Gain and other sources residing at C/o Sangrur Surgical and Laparoscopic Centre, Haripura Road, Sangrur. The appellant filed his return of income on dtd. 30/11/2015, declaring income of Rs. 1,59,87,590/- for the assessment year 2015-16 and paid total tax and interest of Rs. 37,78,150/- The return was processed u/s 143(1) at the same income. During the assessment year 2015-16 the appellant has received compensation under Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTALARR Act, 2013), which is exempt u/s 96 of this act but CBDT has issued circular no 36/2016 as on 25/10/2016. In original return the appellant had considered compensation received as taxable income under the head Short term Capital gain and Long term Capital gain and the above said circular was issued after the period of due date of filing of return. As soon as the appellant came to know about this circular, he has filed rectification application u/s 154 as on 03/01/2018 in which income under the head capital gain has been claimed as exempt and demand a refund of taxes paid on income taken under capital gain head as per the circular no 36/2016 dtd 25/10/2016 along with copy of the circular issued by CBDT along with original ITR with computation as well as rectified computation of income. The learned AO has rejected the application on dtd. 09/11/2018. Now present appeal has been filed for getting relief.
Ground No. 2: The Impugned order is illegal and time barred as the same has not been passed within prescribed time mentioned u/s 154(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
As per the provisions under section 154(8) of the IT. Act, 1961 :- " Where an application for amendment under this section is made on or after the 1st day of June, 2001 to an income tax authority referred to in sub-section (1), the authority shall pass an order, within a period of six months from the end of the month in which the application is received by it- (a) Making the amendment; or (b) Refusing to allow the claim. In the present case application u/s 154 was filed as on 03/01/2018 and order of the same has been received as on 14/11/2018 i.e after the more than 6 months from the end of month in which the application is made. Six months were completed as on 31/07/2018 but order made as on 09/11/2018 and received as on 14/11/2018. As the Id. AO has not passed the order within the prescribed period mentioned in the Income Tax Act, 1961 it becomes illegal and application shall be treated as accepted so-moto. CBDT has also issued instruction no 01/2016 dtd. 15/02/2016 for following the prescribed time limit. Copy of the same is enclosed here with for your kind consideration.
Ground No. 3 : Application for rectification u/s 154 is signed by the authorized representative of the assessee, is non-est in the eyes of law:
The Id. AO has mentioned in her order that the application has signed by authorized representative of the assessee and no power of attorney has been filed with rectification application. It is clarified here that power of attorney was duly signed and given to us by the assessee as on 02/01/2018. As we receipted the application u/s 154 at receipt counter, power of attorney was omitted to attach with the application. After that the Id. AO has not given any opportunity/hearing to submit the power of attorney and directly rejected the application and issued an order by given other facts & grounds along with that the application u/s 154 has not been signed by the assessee. Original power of attorney is shown here for your kind consideration. It is prayed that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case kindly grant the natural justice on this issue.
Ground No. 4 : Application for rectification u/s 154 is rejected holding that relief claimed is not permissible which has neither been claimed in original return nor any return has been revised to that effect:
The Id. AO has rejected the application by saying that the assessee intends his case to be decided as per the particulars which were not shown in the return of income and the assessee wants to do now is to make a fresh claim on the basis of fresh material, which is not permissible u/s 154 because the aseessee has neither claimed the relevant relief in his original return nor any return has been revised to this effect as per the relevant provisions of the law.
As we have submitted earlier that the assessee has received compensation on commercial land under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTALARR Act, 2013) during the FY 2014-15 which was clearly exempt u/s 96 of this act but as per the provisions .of I.T. Act, 1961 there is provision of exemption of capital gain on acquisition of agricultural land but there is no provision of exemption on acquisition of commercial land. As the assessee has received compensation on acquisition of commercial land during the FY 2014-15, due date to file the return was 07/09/2015 but the assessee has filed his return delayed i.e as on 30/11/2015 due to waiting any clarification from Income Tax Department. But CBDT has issued circular no 36/2016, dtd 25/10/2016 after a long period of due date of Wing of return. The assessee has no other option to file return by deposit tax on capital gain and the assessee has done his duty by truly showing his income and deposit the tax along with interest accordingly. After that as soon as the appellant came to know about this circular, he has filed rectification application accordingly. Copy of the Circular is enclosed here with.
Honourable High Court of Punjab and Haryana is also upheld its view in the case of B.S. Bajaj & Sons Vs CTT, IT reference no 104 of 1982 dtd. 05/08/1996-Whether a circular, which is clarificatory in nature extending benefit to assessee in consonance with provisions of act, has to be taken notice of and given effect to, even if it issued subsequent to decision by an authority under act and was not produced before concerned authority. Copy of the Judgement is enclosed here with.
We have also relied on CBDT circular no 14 (XL-35) dtd. 11/04/1955, Miscellaneous-Refund and reliefs due to assesses-Department attitude towards- Officers of the Department must not take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to his rights. It is one of their duties to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs and in this regard the officers should take the initiative in guiding a taxpayer where proceedings or other particulars before them indicate that some refund or relief is due to him. This attitude would, in the long run, benefit the department for it would inspire confidence in him that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the department. Copy of the circular is enclosed here with.
We also relied upon CBDT circular no 68 dtd. 17-11/1971 on u/s 154-Rectification of Mistakes - Mistakes from records - whether can be treated as such on the basis of subsequent decision of Supreme Court. Copy of the circular is enclosed here with.
With all these submissions, it is prayed that application u/s 154 may kindly be accepted.
Ground No. 5: Circular No 36/2016 dtd 25/10/2016 issued by CBDT has grossly ignored while passing the impugned order:
The Id. AO has totally ignored the circular no 36/2016 dtd. 25/10/2016 issued by CBDT while passing the order. Copy of the order is already attached under Ground no 5. Keeping in view the above said circular, it is prayed that appropriate relief may kindly be granted after considering the above submissions.”
6.1 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee held that as per the provisions of section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the income by way of interest received on compensation or on enhanced compensation referred to in Clause B of Section 145A of the act was chargeable to tax under the head Income from other sources. The relevant findings had been given in para 5 to 5.17 of the impugned order which read as under:
I have carefully considered the findings of the Ld. AO, the written submissions of the Ld. AR and contextualized these to the facts of the case. The issue in dispute relates to whether the impugned transaction is exempt being covered under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (hereinafter RFCTLARR) made applicable from January 2014; whereas as per Sections 105& 106 of the RFCTLARR r/w the 4th Schedule of the same Act; The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), prima-facie is one the bodies covered u/s 106 of the RFCTLARR. It may also be pointed out that per schedule 1 of RFCTLAAR Act compensation includes additional compensation, solatium and any other receipt implying that solatium and interest are part of compensation. The LD AR also cited the Central Board of Direct Taxes circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25.10.2016 which extended the exemption by including compulsorily acquired land without any restriction on area as well as classification of land.
5.1 That the land acquired on which compensation has been received has been acquired by the National Highway ( NHAI) is matter of record and is undisputed. That the NHAI is one of the 13 authorities covered under the fourth schedule of the RFCTLARR Act is also crystal clear. The Ld. AO has however, not addressed the appellant's submission regarding the transaction being covered under the RFCTLAR Act and the subsequent CBDT Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25.10.2016. It may be relevant in this connection to examine the entire conspectus of compensation received on land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter LA Act) and the changed position once the RFCTLARR Act has become applicable. 5.2 Compulsory acquisition of agricultural or non-agricultural land under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 resulted in grant of compensation and interest to owners and holders of such land g^aLand Acquisition Act 1894 Act.
5.3 The owners of the land were entitled to or became eligible to the following items of compensation: a. Compensation for land acquisition including solatium b. Enhanced compensation ( by the order of a court) c. Income by way of interest received on compensation u/s 34 of the LA Act that is interest for the period from the of the award to the date of actual payment.
d. Interest on enhanced compensation referred to in clause (b) of section 145A is chargeable to tax under the head 'income from other sources'.
5.4 To sum up the land acquisition Act can be seen with reference to two Rubrics. 1. Compensation /Enhanced Payment 2. Interest 5.5 Specific provisions that apply to such compensation under the IT. Act 1961 are as under: a) Section 10(37) which exempts from tax compensation/enhanced compensation. As per section 10(37) compensation /enhanced compensation on account of compulsory acquisition on agricultural land is exempt from taxation. b) Section 56(2)(vii)/57(iv)/145A(b) which covers interest on such compensation Vide 56(2)(viii) Income by way of interest received on compensation or on enhanced compensation referred to in clause (b) of section 145A is chargeable to tax under the head 'income from other sources'. 5.6 Further, vide section 57(iv) in the case of income of the nature referred to in clause (viii) of sub-section (2) of section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty percent of such income and no deduction shall be allowed under any other clause of this section.
While there was near judicial unanimity with regards to taxability on interest u/s 34 of the land acquisition Act; interest u/s 28 of the land acquisition Act has been a matter of considerable judicial controversy. In a nutshell the controversy was that whether the award under the provisions of section 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 Act is in the nature of enhanced compensation and therefore exempt u/s 13(37). Or Is it the nature of interest and therefore taxable u/s 56(2)(viii) rws 57(iv) and 145A(b)
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Ghansham (HUF) 315 ITR 1 held that interest paid on the excess amount, u/s 28 of 1894 Act, is a part of enhanced compensation.
However, after this order the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta, Manjeet Singh Vs Union of India 2016 237 taxmann 116 (P & H) referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Ghanshyam (Supra), and also referred to a number of other decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and held that the interest received u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is in the nature of interest and is taxable.
5.7 The Hon'ble Jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court while adjudicating this decision referred to the following three judges bench cases 1. Three judges bench decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Shamlal Narula v. CIT, [1964] 53 ITR 151. 2. Three judges bench decision of the Apex Court in T. N. Govindaraju Chetty V CIT (1967) 66 ITR 465. 3. Three Judges Bench decision of Apex Court in Bikram Singh vs. Land Acquisition Collector, (1997) 224 ITR 551.
In all the above cases the Apex Court has held that interest u/s 28 is a revenue receipt. SLP filed was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order C. No. 34642 of 2014 dated 18.12.2014 ordering as under:-
"Heard Ld. Counsel for the petition and perused the relevant material. We don not find any legal and valid grounds for interference. The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed"
5.8 The decision of Manjeet Singh HUF cited supra was followed by number of decisions of P & H High Court.
5.9 The Hon'ble Supreme Court Vide its order dated its order dated 15.09.2017 in the case of Union of India vs Hari Singh and Ors. (2018) 91taxmann.com 20(SC) held as under :- "While determining as to whether the compensation paid was for agricultural land or not, the AOs will keep in mind the provisions of section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act and the law laid done by this court in commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad V. Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009(8_ SCC412) in order to ascertain whether the interest given under the said provisions amounts to compensation or not."
5.10 This order has been followed by the Hon'ble Chandigarh ITAT in the following cases • ITA Nos. 1413 to 1415/CHD/2016 A.Y. : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Shri Satbir, Vs. The ITO • ITA Nos. 1416 to 1418/CHD/2016 A.Y. : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Shri Ved Pal, Vs. The ITO • ITA Nos. 1419 to 1421/CHD/2016 A.Y. : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Shri Sheo Chand, Vs. The ITO A review petition against the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Hari Singh and Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017 is in the process of being filed. 5.11 With the passage of the RFCTLARR Act , all compensation received qua this act are not taxable. This has been clarified by the CBDT vide its Circular NO-36/2016, Dated: October 25, 2016. The Circular makes it clear that even where there is no separate deduction allowable in the income tax Act, any compensation covered by Section 105 & 106 of the RFCTLARR Act, (other than compensation u/s 46 of the RFCTLARR Act) is exempt from taxation. In the instant case, what has been taxed by the Ld. AO as interest, may, if the transaction is found to be covered RFCTLARR Act; is as per the terms of Schedule 1 of the RFCTLARR Act in the nature of enhanced compensation. Further solatium within the terms of Section 31 of the RFCTLARR Act is also part of the compensation. The relevant Section 31 is reproduced as under:
Award of solatium.
The Collector having determined the total compensation to be paid, shall, to arrive at the final award, impose a "Solatium"amount equivalent to one hundred per cent. Of the compensation amount.
Explanation.— For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that solatium amount shall be in addition to the compensation payable to any person whose land has been acquired.
The Collector shall issue individual awards detailing the particulars of compensation payable and the details of payment of the compensation as specified in the First Schedule. 3. In addition to the market value of the land provided under section 27, the Collector shall, in every case, award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per cent, per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification of the Social Impact Assessment study under sub-section (2) of section 4, in respect of such land, till the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier
5.12 However, on the applicability the exemption under income tax Act to compensations received from the National Highway Authority of India, there is lack of clarity and in this connection, it may be relevant to examine the decisions of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Gopa Ram vs Union Of India &Ors. vide order dated 22 January, 2018
5.13 In this judgment the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court first sought to examine whether Section 24 of the Land Acquisition Act 2013 applied to the National Highway Authority of India: The Section is reproduced as under: 24. Land acquisition process under Act No. 1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.-
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,— (a) where no award under section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or (b) where an award under said, section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been repealed.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act: Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
5.14 The hon'ble High Court has ruled as under
The Acquisition Act of 2013 came into force on 01.01.2014, wherein Sub-section (1) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 provides that the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule. The NH Act of1956 figured in the Fourth Schedule at Serial No. 7. The unamended provision of Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 is as follows :-
"(3) The Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, direct that any of the provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and Third Schedules, being beneficial to the affected families, shall apply to the cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule or shall apply with such exceptions or modifications that do not (11 of 15) reduce the compensation or dilute the provisions of this Act relating to compensation or rehabilitation and resettlement as may be specified in the notification, as the case may be."
However, the Central Government vide Ordinance (No.9 of 2014) dated 34.12.2014 has substituted Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013, which reads as under:-
"(3) The provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply
to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule with effect from 1st January 2015."
The provisions of Ordinance (No.9 of 2014) dated 31.12.2014 were continued further vide Ordinance (No.4 of 2015) dated 03.04.2015 and Second Ordinance dated 30.05.2015 (No.5 of 2015) and the same were valid up to 31.08.2015. Subsequently, the Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India issued the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015 vide Notification dated 28.08.2015. The said Order is reproduced below: -
"(1) This Order may be called the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015. ^_ (2) It shall come into force with effect from the 1 st day of September, 2015. (12 of 15) (3) The provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act." From the above, it is clear that the applicability of the Acquisition Act of 2013 has been given effect in respect of the enactment specified in Fourth Schedule including the NH Act of1956 with effect from 01.01.2015.
However, it is to be noticed that as per Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 (as amended), the provision of the Acquisition Act of 2013 relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule have only been applied in the NH Act of 1956 and Section 24 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 is not made applicable to the acquisitions made under the NH Act of1956.
In view of the above, it is held that Section 24 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 has no application in the acquisition proceedings under the NH Act of1956. Now the question comes whether the determination of compensation in lieu of the acquisition of land of the petitioners is to be determined as per the First Schedule of the Acquisition Act (13 of 15) of 2013 or not.
As stated earlier, it is not in dispute that the final awards in respect of the notification issued under Section 3A of the NH Act of 1956 were issued under Section 3G of the NH Act of 1956 prior to 31.12.2014 and whole amount of compensation was deposited by the MoRTH and the PWD with the CALA before 31.12.2014.
In all the writ petitions the petitioners have also admitted that they have received the compensation as determined in the final awards prior to 31.12.2014. The MoRTH has also issued comprehensive guidelines on 28.12.2017 on this point, which is reproduced hereunder :-
(iii) By now, it is also a settled proposition that the First, Second and Third Schedule of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 shall be applicable to the NH Act, 1956 with effect from 01.01.2015. As such, the following is clarified:
(a) All cases of Land acquisition where the Awards had not been announced under Section 3G of the NH Act till 31.12.2014 or where such awards had been announced but compensation had not been paid in respect of majority of the land holdings under
acquisition as on 31.12.2014, the compensation would be payable in accordance with the First Schedule of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
(b) In cases, where the land acquisition process was initiated and award of compensation under Section 3G had also been announced before 01.01.2015 but the full amount of Award had not been deposited by the acquiring agency with the CALA, the compensation amount would be liable to be determined in accordance with the (14 of 15) First Schedule w.e.f. 01.01.2015;
(c) In cases, where the process of acquisition of land stood completed (i.e. Award under Section 3G announced by CALA, amount deposited by the acquiring agency with the CALA, and compensation paid to the landowners in respect of majority of the land under acquisition) as on or before 31.12.2014, the process would be deemed to have been completed and settled. Such cases would not be re-opened. As per Clause-(b) of the above referred guidelines, it is clarified that where the award of compensation under Section 3G of the NH Act of 1956 had been announced before 01.01.2015 but the full amount of award had not been deposited by the acquiring agency with the CALA, the compensation amount would be liable to be determined in accordance with the First Schedule of Acquisition Act of 2013. It is further clarified by Clause-(c) of the above referred guidelines that where the compensation had been deposited by the acquiring agency with the CALA and the compensation amount paid to the land owners in respect of the majority of the land under acquisition on or before 31.12.2014, the acquisition process would be deemed to have been completed and settled and such cases would not be reopened.
As stated earlier, in all these writ petitions, the petitioners have admitted that they have received the compensation as determined in the awards passed under Section 3G of the NH Act of 1956 and they have not disputed this fact that they received (15 of 15) the said compensation amount prior to 31.12.2014.
Though, assertion is made on behalf of the petitioners in these writ petitions as well as during the course of argument that the majority of the land owners was not paid the compensation before 31.12.2014, yet no material is produced on record to prove the said fact. Only the information, said to have been received under the Right to Information Act, is furnished in some of the writ petitions, however, from the said information, it cannot be gathered that compensation was not paid to the majority of the land owners on or before 31.12.2014.
Moreover, it is not in dispute that the acquiring authority i.e. MoRTH and the PWD had already deposited the whole amount of compensation with the CALA before 31.12.2014 and, therefore, it cannot be said that the compensation was not paid before 31.12.2014. The disbursement of compensation to the land owners is the function of the Land Acquisition Officer and if there is any laxity on the part of the Land Acquisition Officer in disbursing the compensation amount, the acquiring authority cannot be held liable for the said inaction.
5.15 From the above decision the following emerges : That As per Sub-section (1) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule and The National Highway Act of 1956 is covered in the fourth schedule Serial No.7.The original provision of provision of Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 states as under: :-
"(3) The Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, direct that any of the provisions of this Act relating to the
determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and Third Schedules, being beneficial to the affected families, shall apply to the cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule or shall apply with such exceptions or modifications that do not (11 of 15) reduce the compensation or dilute the provisions of this Act relating to compensation or rehabilitation and resettlement as may be specified in the notification, as the case may be." 5.16 The Central government through Ordinance (No.9 of 2014) dated 31.12.2014 substituted Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013, which reads as under:-
"(3) The provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule with effect from 1st January 2015." 5.17 The provisions of Ordinance (No.9 of 2014) dated 31.12.2014 were continued further vide Ordinance (No.4 of 2015) dated 03.04.2015 and Second Ordinance dated 30.05.2015 (No.5 of 2015) and the same were valid up to 31.08.2015.Subsequently, the Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India issued the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015 vide Notification dated 28.08.2015. The said Order is reproduced below:- "(1) This Order may be called the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015.
(2) It shall come into force with effect from the 1 st day of September, 2015. (12 of 15) (3) The provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act." From the above, the High Court has ruled, it emerges that the applicability of the Acquisition Act of 2013 has been given effect in respect of the enactment specified in Fourth Schedule including the NH Act of 1956 with effect from 01.01.2015. However, it is to be noticed that as per Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 (as amended), the provision of the Acquisition Act of 2013 relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule have only been applied in the NH Act of 1956 and Section 24 of the Acquisition Act of 2013 is not made applicable to the acquisition is made under the NH Act of 1956. Taking the logic further Section 96 of the land Acquisition Act which exempts the compensation from Income Tax is also not applicable to the land acquisitions covered by the NHAI Act. I see no reason to interfere with the order of the Ld. AO on these grounds. It is ordered accordingly.
Now the assessee is in appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and further submitted that the rectification order passed by the A.O. was not with in time as allowed in the Income Tax Act. It was stated that the application under section 154 of the Act was filed on 03/01/2018 through the counsel and the A.O. passed the order rejecting the application on 14/11/2018 i.e; after more than 6 months from the end of the month in which the application was made which was against the provisions contained in Section 154(8) of the Act. It was further stated that the CBDT vide instruction no. 01/2016 dt. 15/02/2016 very clearly clarified the time limit to pass the order under section 154 of the Act. Reference was made to page no. 20 of the assessee’s paper book.
8.1 As regards to the observations of the A.O. that the application under section 154 of the Act was signed by the counsel of the assessee, it was submitted that the assessee duly authorized the counsel through Power of Attorney which was also furnished before the Ld. CIT(A), copy of which is placed at page no. 21 of the assessees paper book. It was emphasized that the A.O. never demanded the Power of Attorney, therefore it was not furnished before him. It was stated that the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee would not suo-moto file an application with the department unless authorized by the assessee. It was pointed out that the Power of Attorney was dt. 02/01/2018 and the application under section 154 of the Act was filed on 03/01/2018 therefore the said application was valid and has to be acted upon. It was submitted that even the rectification can be made by A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) of their own notion and the signature of assessee are not required. It was further submitted that the A.O. had not asked the assessee for furnishing of power of attorney before dismissing the application under section 154 of the Act and that the A.O. decided the issue on merit. It was stated that the assessee had given the detailed submissions on merit and also on the maintainability of application under section 154 of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) had dealt with the issue threadbare for maintainability of application under section 154 of the Act and passed the order consisting of 14 pages without adversely commenting on the issue of signing the application by the representative of the assessee or that it was time barred. It was contended that though the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on merit only thus he had accepted the claim of the assessee that the application under
section 154 of the Act was legally maintainable. It was also contended that after passing of the order by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT challenging his order on merit but the Department had not filed any appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of dismissal of application under section 154 of the Act by the A.O., having not been signed by the assessee. It was stated that now since there is no appeal by the department on the issue, therefore the appeal of the assessee under section 154 of the Act, in view of the above facts is maintainable as the Ld. CIT(A) had in a detailed order after looking to the submission of the assessee, decided the case on merit.
8.2 It was further stated that the due date for filing of the return of income was 07/09/2015 but the assessee filed his return of income late on 30/11/2015 as he was waiting for the clarification from the Income Tax Department, wherein the subject of exemption from Income Tax on compensation received on commercial land might got clear. But the clarification in the form of CBDT Circular no. 36/2016 dt. 25/10/2016 was issued only in October 2016. It was emphasized that the CBDT Circular no. 68 dt. 17/11/1971 made it clear that a mistake arising as a result of subsequent interpretation of law by the Supreme Court would constitute a mistake apparent from the records and the same is rectifiable under section 154 of the Act. It was contended that the assessee received compensation on which the provisions of RFCTALARR Act were applicable in the assessees case and the compensation received was exempt as per the provisions of section 96 of the said act. The reliance was also placed on the following case laws :
• ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. as reported in 305 ITR 227(SC)
• CIT vs. M/s Motilal Duli Chand 80 CCH 142 (All)
• CIT Vs. Satish Kumar Agarwal 66 DTR 68 (Del )
• Nulux Engineers Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2073/Mum/2017 order of the Mumbai ITAT dt. 05/10/2018
8.3 The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that the clarification by the CBDT by way of Circular became the law of land, therefore, on the basis of the said Circular the mistake was very much rectifiable particularly when the Board Circular is binding on
all the offices of the department. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of B.S. Bajaj & Sons Vs. CIT (IT Ref 104 of 1982 order dt. 05/08/1996).
8.4 It was contended that the assessee received compensation from National Highway Authority of India (NHAI in short) on 05/11/2014 & 23/01/2015. It was further stated that the NHAI is one of the 13 authorities covered under the fourth schedule of the RFCTLARR Act and this fact was also admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) who duly stated in para 5 at page 5 of the impugned order that “ The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), prima-facie is one of the bodies covered under section 106 of the RFCTLARR and that as per Schedule 1 of the RFCTLAAR Act Compensation includes additional Compensation, solatium and any other receipt implying that solatium and interest are part of Compensation .”
8.5 It was contended that the CBDT duly exempt the compensation received under the RFCTLARR Act from the provisions of the Income Tax Act and that the NHAI Act, 1956 is an Act to provide for the declaration of certain highways and for the matters connected therewith. It was further contended that the Circular No. NH 11011/30/2015- LA by the Government of India issued by Ministry of Roads And Transport and Highways, dt. 13/01/2016, have clarified the applicability of provisions of RFCTLARR Act 2013 to NH Act 1956 wherein it has been made clear that “ All cases of Land Acquisition where award has not been announced u/s 3G of the NH Act or where such awards have been announced but compensation had not been paid in respect of majority of land holdings under Acquisition as on 31/12/2014, the compensation would be payable in accordance with the First Schedule of The RFCTLARR Act 2013”.
8.6 Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the close examination of Section 96 of RFCTLARR Act would show that the said section specifically states that the exemption from Income Tax and Stamp Duty could apply to (1) Awards Or (2) Agreements, made under the new Act and Section 23 of the new Act states about enquiry and Land Acquisition award by Collector. It was further stated that section 82 states about power to enter and take possession and compensation. It was also stated that though the acquisition was initiated under the NH Act 1956, the Collector’s proceedings “ to take
order for the acquisition” was under the new Act and thereafter the Collected passed the award in conformity with the New Act and not under the NH Act. Therefore the benefit of Exemption from Income Tax and Stamp Duty would certainly be applicable to the award passed for acquisition under Section 3G of NH Act because effectually the compensation was passed under the provisions of the new Act, even though it was colored as Section 3G of the NH Act. It was stated that the NH Act, 1956 finds a place at Point 7 in the Fourth Schedule. However, order u/s 113 Power Of Removal Of Difficulties, dt. 28/08/2015, issued by the Ministry of Rural Development, extended the benefits of compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement mentioned in First, Second and Third Schedules to the statutes mentioned in the Fourth Schedule of the Act. It was also stated that the NHAI is governed by National Highway Authority Act, 1988, the Clause 13 of the NH Act states that “ Compulsory Acquisition of Land for The Authority – Any Land required by the authority for discharging its functions under this Act shall be deemed to be land needed for a public purpose and such land may be acquired for the authority under the provisions of the NH Act, 1956”.
8.7 It was further stated that Section 2 of the new Act states that the provisions of this Act relating to land acquisition, compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement shall apply, when the appropriate Government acquires land for its own use, hold and control, including for public sector undertakings and for the public purposes and shall include the following purposes namely: Sub clause (B) for infrastructure projects, which includes the following, namely; (i) All activities or items listed in the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Economic Affairs (Infrastructure Section) number 13/06/2009-INF dt. 27/03/2012, excluding private hospitals, private educational institutions and private hotels; the word public purpose in the new act means – Public purpose means the activities specified under sub section (1) of section 2,; the word “Infrastructure Project” means and shall include any one or more of the items specified in Clause(B) of sub section(1) of Section 2 of the new Act. Accordingly it was submitted that the RFCTLARR Act was applicable to the lands forcefully compulsorily acquired for public purpose and development of highway falls under infrastructure project of public purpose. Hence, first by order of removal of difficulties and then by virtue of Section 2 of the RFCTLARR Act makes it amply clear that provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 were
applicable for acquisition of the land where acquisition had been made under NH Act, 1956 and the land so acquired was inevitably for public purpose and hence the person or assessee cannot be deprived of his property in gross disregard of the law of land. The reliance was placed on the following case laws:
• ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Limited, 305 ITR 227 (SC)
• CIT Vs. Motilal Duli Chand, 80 CCH 142 (ALL)
• Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Satish Kumar Aggarwal, 66 DTR 68 (DEL)
• Nulux Engineers Vs. DCIT, in ITA No. 2073/MUM/2017 order dated 05/10/2018 of Mumbai ITAT
In his rival submissions the Ld. DR reiterated the observations made by the authorities below and emphasized the observations made by the Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.17 of the impugned order. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Gopa Ram Vs. Union of India & Ors. order dt. 22/01/2018 which has been discussed by the Ld. CIT(A) at page no. 10 to 12 of the impugned order.
We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the assessee received the compensation on account of land acquired by NHAI. The assessee moved an application before the A.O. for rectification of the mistake and also filed the revised computation of income wherein the Short Term Capital Gain to the tune of Rs. 2,09,108/- and Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 1,54,29,120/- was claimed as exempt on the basis of CBDT Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25/12/2016 wherein it had been specifically stated that all the compensation received on account of compulsory acquisition after 01/01/2014 would be exempt from income tax as per section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act. The assessee moved the application under section 154 of the Act through his counsel on 03/01/2018 and the A.O. passed the order rejecting the application under section 154 of the Act on 14/11/2018 i.e; after 9 months 11 days.
10.1 In the present case it is not in dispute that the assessee received compensation on account of land acquired by NHAI. As per the provisions of section 96 of the
RFCTLARR Act, the exemption from Income Tax and Stamp Duty would apply to an award or agreement made under the new Act which came into force on 01/01/2014. In the instant case the assessee filed its return of income on 30/11/2015 as he was waiting for the clarification from the Income Tax Department wherein the subject of exemption from Income Tax on the compensation received on commercial land might get clear and the clarification from the CBDT came vide Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25/10/2016 which read as under:
Circular No. 36/2016
Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes ITA.II division, North Block, New Delhi, the 25th of October, 2016 Subject: Taxability of the compensation received by the land owners for the land acquired under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('RFCTLAAR Act')-reg.- Under the existing provisions of the income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), an agricultural land which is not situated in specified urban area, is not regarded as a capital asset. Hence, capital gains arising from the transfer (including compulsory acquisition) of such agricultural land is not taxable. Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 inserted section 10(37) in the Act from 01.04.2005 to provide specific exemption to the capital gains arising to an Individual or a HUF from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land situated in specified urban limit, subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. Therefore, compensation received from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land is not taxable under the Act (subject to fulfilment of certain conditions for specified urban land).
The RFCTLARR Act which came into effect from 1st January, 2014, in section 96, inter alia provides that income-tax shall not be levied on any award or agreement made (except those made under section 46) under the RFCTLARR Act. Therefore, compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act (except those made under section 46 of RFCTLARR Act), is exempted from the levy of income-tax.
As no distinction has been made between compensation received for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land and non-agricultural land in the matter of providing exemption from income-tax under the RFCTLARR Act, the exemption provided under section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act is wider in scope than the tax-exemption provided under the existing provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961. This has created uncertainty in the matter of taxability of compensation received on compulsory acquisition of land, especially those relating to acquisition of non-agricultural land. The matter has been examined by the Board and it is hereby clarified that compensation received in respect of award or agreement which has been exempted from levy of income-tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The above may be brought to the notice of all concerned.
Hindi version of the order shall follow.
Sd/- (Rohit Garg) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India (F.No. 225/88/2016-ITA.II)
10.2 From para 3 of the aforesaid Circular it would be clear that no distinction has been made between compensation received for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land and non agricultural land in the matter of providing exemption from income tax under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Now question arises as to whether the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 are applicable to the NH Act 1956 or not. In this regard the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Gopa Ram Vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) referred by the Ld. CIT(A), observed as under:
However, the Central Government vide Ordinance (N0.9 of 2014) dated 31.12.2014 has substituted Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Acquisition Act of 2013, which reads as under:-
"(3) The provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule with effect from 1st January 2015."
The provisions of Ordinance (No.9 of 2014) dated 31.12.2014 were continued further vide Ordinance (N0.4 of 2015) dated 03.04.2015 and Second Ordinance dated 30.05.2015 (N0.5 of 2015) and the same were valid up to 31.08.2015.
Subsequently, the Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India issued the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015 vide Notification dated 28.08.2015. The said Order is reproduced below: -
"(l) This Order maybe called the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015.
(2) It shall come into force with effect from the 1 st day of September, 2015.
(12 of 15) (3) The provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act."
From the above, it is clear that the applicability of the Acquisition Act of 2013 has been given effect in respect of the enactment specified in Fourth Schedule including the NH Act of 1956 with effect from 01.01.2015.
It is therefore clear that the applicability of the Acquisition Act 2013 has been given effect to the NH Act 1956 w.e.f 01/01/2015 and the assessee received the compensation on 05/11/2014 & 23/11/2015. In the present case also the land was compulsorily acquired by NHAI therefore the compensation received by the assessee was exempted under the Income Tax Act. Since the clarificatory Circular was issued by the CBDT on 25/10/2016 i.e; after the date of filing the return by the assessee on 30/11/2015 that is why an application under section 154 of the Act was moved by the assessee.
10.3 As regards to the applicability of the Circular issued by CBDT on the Income Tax Authorities, the Hon'ble Jurisdiction High Court in the case of B.S Bajaj And Sons Vs. CIT [1996] 222 ITR 418 held as under:
“ The circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes are binding on the officers of the Department of Income-tax. Benevolent circulars providing administrative relief to the assessee, even if they are issued subsequent to the decision by an authority under the Act, have to be taken notice of, and given effect to, if found applicable in the given facts. A circular, even if produced in the High Court for the first time during the course of hearing, has to be taken note of and the assessee will be entitled to the benefit of the circular, if found entitled, irrespective of the fact that it was not produced before the authorities below or was issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes subsequent to the decision given by the Tribunal, Circular No. 329. Dated February 22, 1982, issued by the Board does not override the provisions of the Act. It is clarificatory in nature. It is a benevolent circular issued in favour of the assessee providing administrative relief and says that if the process involved is not merely conversion of standing trees into firewood but also manufacture of new saleable commodities, the benefit of deduction under section 80J and 80HH would be available.” 10.4 In the present case also the CBDT vide Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25/10/2016 clarified that the compensation received in respect of award or agreement which has been exempt from levy of Income Tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provisions of exemption for such compensation in the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the said Circular it is also clarified that no distinction had been made towards compensation received for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land and non agricultural land in the matter of providing exemption from Income Tax under the RFCTLARR Act. In the instant
case the assessee received compensation for compulsory acquisition of commercial land during the F.Y. 2014-15 which was exempted under section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, as clarified by the CBDT Circular No. 36/2016 dt. 25/10/2016. We therefore considering the totality of the fact as discussed hereinabove are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the action of the A.O. in not accepting the claim of the assessee for exemption of the compensation received on compulsory acquisition of land acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer from Income Tax. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The facts involved in appeal of Smt. Urmila Garg Vs. ITO, Ward Sangrur in ITA No. 1183/Chd/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 are identical to the facts involved in the case of Shri Satish Kumar Vs. ITO, Ward, Sangrur in ITA No. 1182/Chd/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 (supra) therefore our findings given in the former part of this order shall apply mutatis mutandis for this appeal also.
In the result, appeal of the assessee’s are allowed.
(Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/08/2021 )
Sd/- Sd/- आर.एल. नेगी एन.के.सैनी, (R.L. NEGI ) ( N.K. SAINI) �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member उपा�य� / VICE PRESIDENT AG Date: 31/08/2021
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File