PHOOL SINGH,HISAR vs. ITO WARD-1, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1520/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)5 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 held that the rectification application was not sustainable as the law regarding enhanced compensation and interest was settled against the assessee by the High Court and Supreme Court. Therefore, there was no error in the Tax Authorities' decision to deny the benefit.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed five appeals against orders passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2014-15 to 2018-19. The assessee sought rectification under Section 154 for interest received from HUDA on compulsory acquisition of land compensation, claiming it was not taxable.

What were the issues?

Whether the interest received from HUDA on compulsory acquisition of land compensation is taxable and whether the rectification application seeking to claim it as non-taxable was sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 56(2),Section 57

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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 ‘A’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Hearing: 02/09/2025Pronounced: 02/09/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.1517/Del/2023
ITA No.1519/Del/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, AM: These five appeals are preferred by the Assessee against the orders all dated 20.03.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Years 2014- 15 to 2018-19 respectively.

2.

None appeared for the assessee at the time of hearing. Earlier adjournment was sought for and the date was granted in the presence of the assessee representative. No fresh notice is justified as we have gone through the issues involved and it appears that issues are covered against the assessee and thus assessee is not putting in appearance. Ld. DR was heard.

3.

On a perusal of the material, we find that assessee’s return of income was processed u/s 143(1). Subsequently, rectification application u/s 154 of the Act was filed by the assessee on the basis of that interest receipt from HUDA on compulsory acquisition of land compensation is not taxable and reliance was placed on few decisions upon Hon’ble Supreme Court and of this Tribunal, however, vide order dated 27.11.2020, the rectification application was dismissed by the Assessing Officer by observing that there is no mistake apparent from record and the same has been sustained by the Ld. CIT(A), for which assessee is in appeal.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →