SADHU SINGH ,KALKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PANCHKULA

These are two appeals filed by the assessees feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA No.367 & 390/CHD/2026 A.Y.2015-16 2 (Appeals), ( in short ‘the CIT (Appeals)’ dated 30.01.2025 and 11.03.2025 respectively on the grounds mentioned herein below :

ITA 367/CHD/2026

“1. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not admitting the appeal and in refusing to grant reasonable opportunity of hearing/adjournment to the Appellant, without appreciating that the Appellant had neither received any physical notice nor any effective communication of the proceedings, as all notices were served only on the email IDs viz. nitishl319yadav@gmail.com and manu232542@gmail.com, which belonged to the Authorised Representative. The said Authorised Representative did not inform the Appellant about the notices or proceedings and, despite the Appellant having provided the necessary documents, no effective compliance or written submissions were made before the authorities, thereby resulting in denial of proper opportunity and gross violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. That the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are void ab initio as the mandatory sanction under Section 151 was granted on 23.05.2018 in the name of Baldev Singh S/o Sh. Inder Ram R/o Surajpur and not in the name of the present assessee, Baldev Singh S/o Sh. Inder Singh R/o Manakpur Devi Lal, thereby rendering the very assumption of jurisdiction illegal, invalid, and without authority of law and consequently the impugned order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer deserves to be quashed. 3. That no Document Identification Number (DIN) is mentioned on the body of the assessment order dated 01.11.2019; whereas, in terms of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019, it was mandatory to generate and quote a valid DIN on all communications issued by the Income-tax Department on or after 01.10.2019. In the absence of a valid DIN, the impugned assessment order is void ab initio and the entire assessment proceedings deserve to be quashed. 4. That the agricultural land of the assessee was acquired pursuant to 'Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 30.11.2006, and the interest received on enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is exempt under Section 10(37) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) therefore, the additions so made by the Learned Assessing Officer are unsustainable in law and deserve to be deleted. 5. That Department itself says that interest amount is exempt if principal amount is exempt. Department in its website at https://incometaxindia.gov.in/tutorials/81.tax-treatment-on-compulsory- acquisition-of-land.pdf is saying that on second last paragraph of page 3 "Further, in view of Section 145B, such interest shall be taxable in the previous year in which it is received. The interest on compensation or enhanced compensation shall be chargeable to tax only if the original or enhanced compensation is taxable. Thus, if compensation is exempt from tax, the interest

ITA No.367 & 390/CHD/2026 A.Y.2015-16 3 payable on such compensation shall also be exempt from tax.". Hence, addition made of Rs. 14,25,970- be deleted. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the Grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard and disposed off.”

ITA 390/CHD/2026

ITA No.367 & 390/CHD/2026 A.Y.2015-16 4 held that Interest amounts received by assessee in respect of delayed payment of compensation enhanced compensation under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would partake character of principal Rs. 3 I compensation and would be classified as capital gains and consequently, would also get benefit of section 10 37 if land compulsorily acquired was agricultural land. The Honble Kerla High Court, while passing the above judgment, has also considered the judgment of Honble High Cout of Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus Id. AO as well as CIT appeal has wrongly denied the benefit of exemption to the appellant. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, OR withdraw any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.

ITA No.367 & 390/CHD/2026 A.Y.2015-16 5 4. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Shri Ajay Jain, I do not find any reason to allow the appeal, though the assessee was ex parte before the authorities below; however, considering the issue being covered against the assessee, I, following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee. Accordingly, both the appeals filed by the assessees are dismissed.

Order pronounced on 24th June,2026.

(LALIET KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar