PAWAN KUMAR ,KARNAL HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KARNAL HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3891/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 July 2026AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed the decisions of the Delhi and Punjab & Haryana High Courts regarding compensation received under the Land Acquisition Act. These decisions were made after amendments to Section 56(2)(vii) and Section 57(4) of the Income-tax Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order. The assessee did not appear for any of the hearings. The Tribunal proceeded to hear the appeal based on the Revenue's submissions.

What were the issues?

The taxability of compensation received under the Land Acquisition Act, considering amendments to relevant sections of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(vii),Section 57(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.02.2025

(Assessment Year: 2018-19) Pawan Kumar, vs. Income Tax Officer, HN-24/4, DERA Begampura, Karnal. VPO – Gudha, Tehsil Gharaunda, Karnal – 132 114 (Haryana). (PAN : BOQPK1912N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11.02.2025 Date of Order : 11.02.2025 O R D E R

PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM:

1.

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 26.10.2023 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee from the date of first posting on 27.03.2024 and subsequently several hearing dates were given but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We proceeded to adjudicate the issue with the assistance of ld. DR of the Revenue.

3. Considered the submissions of the ld. DR of the Revenue and we observed that the issue under consideration is relating to compensation received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition of the Act and the issue under consideration is squarely covered against the assessee by the Hon’ble High Courts of Delhi as well as Punjab & Haryana in the cases of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax 10 v. Inderjit Singh Sodhi (HUF) reported in [2024] 423 ITR 13 (Delhi) and Mahender Pal Narang [2021] 415 ITR 13 (P & H) & Puneet Singh (2019) 415 ITR 215(P&H). The above said decisions are pronounced by the Hon’ble High Courts after the amendment of section 56(2)(vii) r.w.s. 57 (4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) Therefore, respectfully following the above decision, we are inclined to dismiss the grounds raised by the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)

All 365 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →