SHALLENDER RATHEE,JHAJJAR vs. WARD 2 ROHTAK, ROHTAK

ITA 7651/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 September 2026AY 2020-219 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order was not sustainable. It relied on 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) for individuals and HUFs acquiring agricultural land.

What were the facts?

The assessee received interest on land acquisition compensation. The Assessing Officer (AO) accepted the assessee's claim that this interest was part of enhanced compensation and exempt under Section 10(37). The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) revised this order, citing a High Court decision that such interest should be taxed as income from other sources.

What were the issues?

Whether interest received on land acquisition compensation 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). Whether the PCIT's revisionary order under Section 263 was justified based on a High Court decision that was later distinguished by Supreme Court rulings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(37),Section 56(2)(viii),Section 57(iv),Section 145A,Section 263,Section 28

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 20.08.2026Pronounced: 20.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, 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/250/2026-27/1089118392(1), dated 21.05.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the sole substantive issue between the parties is that of Shallender Rathee

correctness of the learned lower authorities action assessing the assessee’s interest component of land acquisition compensation u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, while invoking section 57(iv) r.w.s. 56(1)

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 558 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(37) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →