SHIVAJI VITHALRAO NARHARE,LATUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, LATUR, LATUR

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE

BEFORE MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1107/PUN/2024
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2015-16
Shivaji Vithalrao Narhare,
Plot No.236, Suraya Bungal,
Avishkar
Housing
Society,
RTO Office, Babalgaon Roads,
Sarola, Latur – 413512. Maharashtra.
V s
The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1, Latur.
PAN: AAHPN3610J

Appellant/ Assessee

Respondent / Revenue

Assessee by Mr.Govind D. Chevale - AR
Revenue by Shri Arvind Renge – Addl.CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
29/07/2025
Date of pronouncement 30/07/2025

आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

This is an appeal filed by Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2015-16 dated
08.04.2024, emanating from order u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act,
1961, dated 27.12.2017. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

ITA No.1107/PUN/2024 [A]

2
“1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in completing the assessment without issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Therefore, the assessment order passed by the learned AO is null and void. The appellant hereby prays that the order under section 144 of the Act be quashed.

2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in issuing an order under section 144 of the Act without because the Appellant had submitted the details requested vide notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act issued by the learned AO.
The appellant hereby prays that the order under section 144 of the Act be quashed.

3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in making the addition of Rs 39,13,072/- under section 57 (iv) rws 145A(b) of the IT act. The appellant hereby prays that the addition of Rs 39,13,072/- may please be deleted.

4) The appellant hereby reserves the right to add, amend, alter, delete, or raise any additional ground/s on or before the hearing date.”

Submission of ld.AR :

ITA No.1107/PUN/2024 [A]

3
➤ The assessee Mr. Shivaji Vithalrao Narhare is resident of India and farmer and a senior citizen residing in Latur, Maharashtra. The assessee owned a land admeasuring 86 R at village Harangul (Bk),
Taluka Latur, District Latur These lands were acquired by the Govt. of Maharashtra for MIDC Latur during the year 1992 for which an order was passed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (LAA), 1894, awarding compensation of Rs 87,309/- Land compensation received by assesse 18/11/1992

➤ Assesse filed appeal on 21-07-1999 against compensation paid by the Govt. of Maharashtra, MIDC Latur in district court Latur
Honorable district court pronounced its order on 26-09-2012
enhancing the compensation by awarding additional compensation to the assessee of Rs. 1,56,52,289/- Exhibit -1 - District court order with consideration.

Compensation from MIDC on account of the acquisition of agricultural land on 07/05/1992 along with interest as per the district court order.

Details of compensation working are as follows:
Particulars
Amount
Land Consideration
20,82,060
30% Land Premium
6,24,617
Total land Consideration
27,06,677
Interest on delay payment (18/11/1992 to 03/01/1998)
12,07,595
Consideration with Interest as of 03/01/1998
39,14,272
Original land consideration received
87,307
Balance Land Consideration
38,26,965
Interest (18/11/1992 to 17/11/1993)
3,44,427
Interest (18/11/1993 to 17/11/2013)
1,14,80,897
Total Interest (18/11/1992 to 17/11/2013)
1,18,25,324
Due as per District Court Order
1,56,52,289
Received
78,26,144
Balance
78,26,145

ITA No.1107/PUN/2024 [A]

4
Details of compensation working as per Honorable Bombay High
Court Aurangabad Bench are as follows :

Particulars
Amount
Land Consideration
89,440/-
30% Land Premium
26,832/-
Total land Consideration
1,16,272/-
Interest on delay payment (07/05/1992 to 03/01/1998)
79,014/-
Consideration with Interest as of 03/01/1998
1,95,286/-
Original land consideration received
87,307
Balance Land Consideration
1,07,979/-
Interest @9% from 04/01/1998 to 23/12/2021
2,33,102/-
Total Amount Due With interest
3,41,081/-
Received
78,26,144/-
Deposit to be Refunded
74,85,064/-

Against district court order, the State of Maharashtra through the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation filed a statutory appeal before THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD since it did not accept any portion of the award passed by the District Court. Maharashtra Industrial
Development Corporation filed first appeal stamp No 10535 of 2013
and Civil Application No 7578 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD in 2013
against order passed by honorable district court Latur.

In this appeal, an application for stay of the order of the District Court was also moved before THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Subsequently, for grant of stay,
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD passed an interim order asking the applicant to deposit the entire amount payable as per the judgment and award by the District Court, within a period of three months from the date of the said stay order The High Court also permitted the assessee to withdraw the ITA No.1107/PUN/2024 [A]

5
said amount, if deposited by the applicant, which was subjected to furnishing of adequate security for the said amount, to the satisfaction of the Court Honorable THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Exhibit-2-Stay Order Oct 2013. Pursuant to this order Assesee Mr. Shivaji Vithalrao Narhare and other filed civil application No. 3411 of 2014 in FA/2800/2013 before The High Court Of Judicature Of Bombay Bench At Aurangabad to allow withdrawal of award money which is deposited by the MIDC Latur as per The High Court Of Judicature Of Bombay Bench At Aurangabad interim order CA No 7578 of 2013. The Court had accept the applicant/claimant is allowed to withdraw 50% amount (ie 25% of total compensation awarded by Reference Court) deposited in this Court on 13.1.2014 without furnishing any surety and the remaining 50% amount ie (25% of total compensation awarded by Reference Court) is allowed to be withdrawn on the applicant/claimant furnishing Nationalized
Bank/Scheduled bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the