KULJEET SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), GURGAON

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 31.08.2023 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’, for short) in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10040192 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 17.03.2021 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the National Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

None has appeared for the assessee at the time of arguments and record shows notices have been repeatedly issued by post and also e-mail.

On hearing ld. DR and after taking into consideration the material on record, we find that the issue in dispute arises out of disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 10(37) of the Act. The assessee had claimed the exemption on the basis of interest earned by way of enhanced compensation out of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land which the tax authorities have considered as ‘Income from other sources’. In this regard, we find that the Hon’ble P&H, High Court in the case Mahindra Pal Narang vs. CBDT (2020) 423 ITR 13 dated 19/2/2020 considered the provisions of Section 10 (37), 56 (2) (viii), 57 (iv), 145B of the Income Tax Act and the plea of assessee that interest received on enhanced compensation shall not be assessed as income from other sources in the year in which it is received. Special leave petition against this decision has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 04.03.2021. Since the AO of the present case falls under the jurisdiction of Hon’ble P &H High Court, therefore, ratio of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has a binding precedent in the present case. Further in a recent decision the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in & CM Appl.6505//2023, in the case of PCIT Vs Inderjit Singh Sodhi [HUF], has decided this issue in favour of the revenue 2