COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-1 vs. M/S INDIAN NEWS PAPER SOCIETY

We are informed that the appeal was earlier under diary no.144135/2014 by another counsel. It was re-filed under the current diary/registration number by the present signing counsel. 2. In view of the order, the earlier diary no.144135/2014 is directed to be deleted. 3. This appeal is hopelessly time barred. The Revenue has preferred it under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act and after delay of 710 days. 4. Although the appeal would fail on the ground of delay, the Court also notices that the question of law sought to be urged is whether the amount assessed as income in the hands of the assessee, on account of additional deposit made for securing FSI, is no longer res integra. It is covered by a previous judgment of this Court in

......As far as the present case is concerned, the facts brought on record, and which have not been contested by the Revenue, unmistakably show that the payment of the lease premium for the land given on lease to the Assessee for a period of 80 years with “all the rights, easements and appurtenances” was in the nature of a capital expenditure. This coupled with the fact that the MMRDA did not treat the receipt as income clinches the issue in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue.”

For the above reasons, we find no merit in the appeal. It is dismissed along with the pending applications.