CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

315 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2009#207 most cited

What is CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) authority for?

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

363

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ghanshyam HUF · Section 28 Land Acquisition Act · enhanced compensation · compulsory acquisition · interest income taxability · capital gains · Section 10(37) Income Tax Act · Section 45(5) Income Tax Act · Section 56(2)(viii) Income Tax Act · agricultural land acquisition

Also reported as

8 SCC 412182 Taxmann 368

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57(iv)Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 1961Section 45(5)Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(viii)section 56(viii)section 155(16)section 45(5)(c)section 145b(1)section 45(5)(b)section 23(1a)section 145bsection 145a(b)section 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

Ashok Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Gurgaon

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 214/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor & Shri Amit Shukla, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Agopg4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, Ito, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 Pan-Bqopr0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, Dcit, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Circle-3, Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Cwyps7360D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Karan Singh Dagar, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-2(3), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Brgpd0122G Appellant Respondent

Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, ITO, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 PAN-AGOPG4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, ITO, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 PAN-BQOPR0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, DCIT, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot…

Karan Singh Dagar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Gurgaon

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 213/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor & Shri Amit Shukla, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Agopg4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, Ito, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 Pan-Bqopr0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, Dcit, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Circle-3, Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Cwyps7360D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Karan Singh Dagar, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-2(3), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Brgpd0122G Appellant Respondent

Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, ITO, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 PAN-AGOPG4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, ITO, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 PAN-BQOPR0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, DCIT, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot…

Puran Singh, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 3, Gurgaon

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1425/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor & Shri Amit Shukla, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Agopg4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, Ito, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 Pan-Bqopr0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, Dcit, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Circle-3, Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Cwyps7360D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Karan Singh Dagar, Ito, C/O-Ysr & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-2(3), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 Pan-Brgpd0122G Appellant Respondent

Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Amar Chand Gupta, ITO, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot No.214, Ward-1(1), Basement, Near Vigilance Office, Gurgaon, Sector-47, Gurgaon-122001 PAN-AGOPG4243M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Shri Daya Ram, ITO, S/O- Chandan Lal, H. No.41/1, Harmony Ward-1(4), Homes, Sushant Lok 3, Sector 57, Gurgaon, Gurgaon 122001 PAN-BQOPR0381Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Shri Puran Singh, DCIT, C/O-YSR & Associates, Plot…

ITO, Rewari vs. Sh. Manish Yadav, Rewari

ITA 3836/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri T.S. Kapoor, [Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 145ASection 28Section 56Section 56(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2012-13] ITO, Sh. Manish Yadav, Ward No.2, Rewari, Model Town, S/o-Sh. Jai Prakash, Rewari (Haryana), H. No.499, Mehrwara, Rewari, Haryana-123401 Haryana PAN-AGWPY4077F Appellant Respondent Revenue by Ms. Rinku Singh, Assessee by Shri Kapil Geol, Date of Hearing 08/08/2019 Date of Pronouncement 09/08/2019 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A), dated 19/04/2016. The…

Sri.Abdul Kareem, Ernakulam vs. The ITO, Aluva

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.T.John GeorgeFor Respondent: Sri.Shantom Bose
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 153Section 263Section 28Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…nd would not be taxable since the original compensation received was exempt u/s 10(37) of the I.T.Act For the above said proposition, the learned AR has strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) [(2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC)]. 5.1 The learned Departmental Representative strongly supported the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax passed u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Certain agricultural property of the assessee was compulsorily acquired by the Government during the assessment year 2011-2012.…

Bhim Sain, Fatehabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5999/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Om Prakash, Fetahabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5998/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Jagdish Kumar, Fatehabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5997/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Parveen Kumar Anand (HUF), Fatehabad vs. ITO, Ward-2, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5996/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Ashok Kumar, Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5995/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Arjun Dass, Fatehabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

In the result, all the 06 appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5994/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56(2)(vii)

…Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOl CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 reported in 237 Taxman 116 overlooking the following binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 UOI vs. Hari Singh and ors. (dated 15.9.2017) 2.2 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has er…

Opinder Singh Virk, Karnal vs. ITO, Karnal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2971/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year 2011-12 Shri Opinder Singh Virk Vs Income-Tax Officer, Pravesh Kumar Sharma, R/O 493- Ward-2, Karnal. L, Model Town, Karnal. Pan: Aeppv9041P Appellant Respondent

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 28Section 45(5)Section 56Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year 2011-12 Shri Opinder Singh Virk vs Income-tax Officer, Pravesh Kumar Sharma, R/o 493- Ward-2, Karnal. L, Model Town, Karnal. PAN: AEPPV9041P Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Gurjeet Singh, CA Revenue by Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR Date of Hearing 14.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 14.03.2019 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.3.2015 in Appeal No.IT/91/KNL/CIT(A)/KNL/2013-14…

Income Tax Officer Ward-1 & Tps, Bagalkot vs. Shri Prabhayya Basayya Saraganachani, Bagalkot

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 858/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Years : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri. Prabhayya Basayya Saragachari, At. Muchakhandi Tq & Ward 1 & Tps, Dist. – Bagalkot – 587 102. Bagalkot. Pan : Doips 6443 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Kambiyavar, Advocate
Section 10(37)Section 14Section 145Section 145ASection 2Section 56Section 57

…conclusion that the interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is cost accretion to the capital asset and cannot be taxed under section 56(2)(viii) relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT, Faridabad v. Ghanshyam (HUF) 315 ITR 1 (SC) which was applicable on the issue prior to A.Y. 2010-11 before the amendment to section 56 of the I.T. Act, 1961. (3) The leanred CIT(Appeals) erred in holding that the sub-clause (viii) to sub-section (2) of section 56 was amended to nullify the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rama Bai v. CIT (1990) 181 ITR 400 (SC) which is…

Baldev Singh, Karnal vs. ITO, Karnal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2970/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year 2011-12 Shri Baldev Singh, Vs Income-Tax Officer, R/O 493-L, Model Town, Ward-2, Karnal. Karnal. Pan: Ascps1945A

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 28Section 45(5)Section 56Section 57

…the learned CIT(A) stating that the interest received by the assessee u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is part of compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37) of the Act in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Ghanshyam Dass&V Ors, 315 ITR 1 (SC) followed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Gobind Bhai Mamaiya, 367 ITR 498 (SC). The assessee, therefore, contended that the ld. AO treated the interest on enhanced compensation as interest income and has taxed it as interest income received u/s 57(iv) of the Act read with Section 145A of the Act whereas the interest on enhanced…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Mr. Sudhir Choudhary, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 2013/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Smt. Jyoti Narula, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…its income on receipt basis and made addition accordingly in the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act passed on 29/12/2011. The Assessing Officer relied on the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghansyam HUF 315 ITR 1 (SC) to support the proposition that interest on compensation and enhanced compensation received by the assessee is taxable in the year of the receipt. 3. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)held that appeal of the Delhi Administration against the arbitration award was pending before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, therefore matter was sub-judice and pe…

Smt. Sushma Gupta, Faridabad vs. ITO, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1823/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-12

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 23Section 23(1)Section 23(2)Section 28Section 34Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi Before : Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2010-12 Smt. Sushma Gupta, C/o Vijay Kumar vs. Income-tax Officer, Gupta, Advocate, Opp. Jain Mandir, Ward 1(3), Faridabad. Main Bazar, Ballabhgarh, Faridabad. PAN: ACGPG 7553G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2019 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)- Faridabad d…

ITO, Ward-1(5), Gurgaon vs. Gordhan, Gurgaon

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3996/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 2(14)

…ons of section 28 of LA Act. is part of the enhanced compensation or is it taxable as interest income has been a debatable issue and has been considered by number of judicial authorities. 5.7 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s Ghansham (HUF) 315 ITR 1 held that interest paid on the excess amount, u/s 28 of 1894 Act., depends upon a claim by the person whose land is acquired whereas interest u/s 34 is for delay in making payment. Interest u/s 28 is a part of enhanced value of land which is not the case in the matter of payment of interest u/s 34. 5.8 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court…

Sh. Bharat Bhushan, Sirsa vs. Pr. CIT, Hisar

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 597/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 28

…on the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOI CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 and overlooking the following judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1 (SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 4 98(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014)) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 Union of India and ORS vs. Hari Singh and ORS v) C.A. No. 18475/2017 Income Tax Officer TDS-2 Rajkot vs. Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri 3.2 That the lear…

Sh. Raj Kumar Kamboj, Sirsa vs. Pr. CIT, Hisar

Appeals of the assessees are hereby allowed

ITA 650/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Mohan Singh
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…on the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOI CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 and overlooking the following judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 4 98(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014)) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 Union of India and ORS vs. Hari Singh and ORS v) C.A. No. 18475/2017 Income Tax Officer TDS-2 Rajkot vs. Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri 3.2 That the lear…

Sh. Sucha Singh, Sirsa vs. Pr. CIT, Hisar

Appeals of the assessees are hereby allowed

ITA 611/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Mohan Singh
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…on the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has erroneously relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Manjit Singh v. UOI CWP No. 15506/2013 dated 14.1.2014 and overlooking the following judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 ITR 1(SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (dated 16.7.2009) ii) 367 ITR 4 98(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (dated 4.9.2014)) iii) C.A. No, 13053/2017 CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (dated 12.9.2017) iv) C.A. No. 15041/2017 Union of India and ORS vs. Hari Singh and ORS v) C.A. No. 18475/2017 Income Tax Officer TDS-2 Rajkot vs. Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri 3.2 That the lear…