ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAGAT RAM TREHAN & SONS, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5404/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 March 2017AY 2007-0816 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the damages were capital in nature as they were for loss of business source. The Tribunal also held that the interest component of the award, being sub judice and shown as a liability, could not be taxed in the current year.

What were the facts?

The assessee received arbitration awards from DDA as escalation damages and interest. The Assessing Officer treated these as revenue receipts and made additions. The CIT(A) deleted these additions, holding them as capital receipts and that the interest was not taxable in the year of receipt.

What were the issues?

Whether arbitration awards received as escalation damages and interest are capital or revenue receipts. Whether interest on disputed awards can be taxed before final determination.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 28(va)

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 “D, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI L.P. SAHU

order of court could not be treated as income accrued to the assessee.

In the case of CIT v. Bhoop Ram Dagar HUF (2008) 173 Taxman 8

(P&H) High Court, it has been held that interest on enhanced compensation cannot be taxable till the issue relating to it attains finality as the same would accrue to assessee at that time only.

Further in the case of CIT v. Karanbir Singh (2008) 169 Taxman 85

(P&H) High Court, it was held that revenue was not entitle to tax amount of interest received by the assessee till such time proceedings in reference to compensation attain finality.

In the case of Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Girija Ammal (2006)

154 Taxman 211 (Mad.) it was held that additional compensation received could not be treated as part of compensation received for transfer of land until it was finally determined by High Court or Supreme Court and 'if the appeal of State Govt. against enhanced compensation received by assessee was allowed, assessee was bound to refund amount and, hence, same could not be assessed before reaching finality.

7.7 In view of the facts and findings of the case and the legal proposition relied upon by the assessee, the issue relating to damages and interest of Rs. 77,73,520/ - being still subjudice cannot be brought to tax in the year under consideration. The finding of the Assessing Officer in this respect that if the assessee fails in appeal by the judgement of Hon'ble High Court then the same will be deducted from its income is not justified. After considering the relevant facts of case and in view of the legal proposition cited in cases relied upon by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition of Rs. 77,73,520/, which does not need any interference on my part, hence, I uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and dismiss the ground no. 2 raised by the Revenue.

8.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29/03/2017.

More judgments on Section 28(va)

All 102 judgments and leading authorities on Section 28(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →