KUMAR SATISH,GURUGRAM vs. ITO WARD 2(2), GURUGRAM

ITA 6552/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 September 2026AY 2014-159 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee received interest component of land acquisition compensation. The Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's claim that this interest was part of enhanced compensation and exempt under Section 10(37). The PCIT, relying on an audit objection and certain High Court decisions, directed the AO to tax this interest.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order was unsustainable as it was based solely on an audit objection and overlooked Supreme Court decisions affirming that interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is part of enhanced compensation and exempt under Section 10(37).

What were the issues?

Whether interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is taxable as income from other sources or is part of enhanced compensation exempt under Section 10(37), and whether a PCIT can assume revisional jurisdiction based solely on an audit objection.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(37),Section 56(1)(a),Section 57(iv),Section 145A(b),Section 28,Section 144,Section 250,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: CA Ms. Pinky Jangra, AR
Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 04.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1087222376(1), dated 12.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 144 r.w.s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Delay of 11 days in filing of the assessee’s/Revenue’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the sole substantive issue between the parties is that of correctness of the learned low

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10(37)

All 555 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(37) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →