KALPESH BABUBHAI DALAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

C/SCA/991/2022 ORDER DATED: 26/04/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 991 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 923 of 2022 ============================================= KALPESH BABUBHAI DALAL Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD ============================================= Appearance: MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 M R BHATT & CO.(5953) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ============================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

Date : 26/04/2022

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. We have heard Mr. B.S. Soparkar, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. M.R. Bhatt, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue. 2. The pivotal issue that falls for our consideration is whether the compensation received by the husband towards the death of his wife in a terrorist attack could be termed as income as defined under Section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 3. The case on hand is one of reopening of assessment of two relevant Assessment Years; A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014- 15. If the compensation received cannot be termed as income then the proceedings initiated under Section 148 should failed. If it is otherwise then the matter may have to be looked into on Page 1 of 3

C/SCA/991/2022 ORDER DATED: 26/04/2022 its own merits. To recapitulate the facts, the wife of the writ applicant was a passenger of PAN AM 73 flight of 05.09.1986 that came to be hijacked by the terrorists and in the said unfortunate event, the wife got killed amongst many other passengers on the ill-fated flight. 4. A group of passengers signed what they termed a “Joint Prosecution Agreement”. The agreement declared that the parties to it had a common interest in pursuing the legal remedies against Libya and the individuals responsible for the hijacking. In 2006, the parties to the agreement filed a Law Suit against the Libyan Government. While the Law Suit was pending, the United States of America and Libya reached a diplomatic settlement relating to the claims against the Libyan Government for the acts of terrorism. Under the settlement, the United States agreed to bring about the termination of all then pending terrorism related litigation against the Libya in American Courts. In turn, Libya agreed to deposit $1.5 billion in a settlement fund. 5. The writ applicant received following amounts out of the settlement fund: FY 12-13 Rs.8,11,64,663/- FY 13-14 Rs.34,24,526/- FY 14-15 Rs.10,15,47,180/- 6. In the aforesaid factual background, both the writ applications have been filed as the Revenue seeks to reopen the assessment for the relevant assessment years. 7. It appears that the department has thought fit to drop the reassessment proceedings. Page 2 of 3

C/SCA/991/2022 ORDER DATED: 26/04/2022 8. In view of the aforesaid, now there is no good reason for us to determine the pivotal issue. 9. In such circumstances referred to above, both the writ applications are disposed of. Notice, if any, stands discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) NEHA Page 3 of 3