Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
(Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vishal Chandra Gupta, CA Deptt. By : Shri Amrit Lal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 06.06.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 07.06.2017 ORDER
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 15.09.2016 in relation to Assessment Year 2013-14.
The only issue raised in this appeal is against the treating the net interest of Rs.23,46,181/-, being the amount of interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as chargeable to tax u/s 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’)
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee received interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act which was claimed as exempt.
Invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(vii), the Assessing Officer, after allowing deduction @ 50% of receipt towards expenses, added Rs.23,46,181/- to the total income. The ld. CIT(A) approved the decision of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is aggrieved against such sustenance of addition.
Having heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record, it is seen that the amount of interest received by the assessee is chargeable to tax in the year of receipt in view of insertion of clause (viii) to section 56(2) by the Finance No. (2) Act 2009 w.e.f 01.04.2010. This provision read with section 145A(b) makes it clear that interest received by assessee on compensation or an enhanced compensation shall be deemed to the income of the year in which it is received. The learned CIT(A) has rightly set out and relied on the of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the case of Manjeet Singh (HUF) vs. UOI (CWP No. 15506 of 2013) dated 14.1.2014, being the jurisdictional High Court. In view of foregoing discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was right in treating the amount as chargeable to tax.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 07th June, 2017.