Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED

122 ITR 21Supreme Court of India1980#9336 most cited

What is Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED authority for?

Interest on enhanced compensation accrues year after year from the date of possession until the date of the order granting enhanced compensation, not solely on the date of the court's order.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED · 122 ITR 21 · enhanced compensation · interest accrual · Land Acquisition Act · date of possession · date of order

Sections most often in play

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145A(b)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 141section 282a(1)section 194lasection 145a(b)section 145bsection 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)section 10(37)doctrine of mergerenhanced compensationsection 197

Judgments citing Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED

Sh. Randhir Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT Rohtak, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 494/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Surjeet Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 488/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 290/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Dhuni Chand HUF, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 289/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Sh. Kashmir Singh Sandha, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 288/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

M/S Ganesh Dass HUF, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 287/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Sh. Arvail Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 286/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich was upheld by the Supreme Court in this matter, that the issue has been considered by this Court in all its aspects. The principle of the decision also derives support from the earlier decision of this Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appeals before us [Civil Appeal Nos. 810 of 1974 and 3027 of 1988] have to be allowed and the references made under section 257 [Tax Reference Case Nos. 3 of 1976 and 1 to 3 of 1978] have to be answered by saying that the question of accrual of interest will have to be determined in accordanc…

Tarun Kanti Roy, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-2(4), Burdwan

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1778/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, & Mrs. Saswati Mitra Dutta,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl.CIT
Section 145ASection 250Section 45(5)

…ase of Rama Bai vs CIT [1991] 54 Taxman 496 (SC) held as follows : In view of the decisions in CIT v. T.N.K.Govindarajulu Chetty [1987] 165 ITR 231 (SC), T.N.K. Govindarjulu Chetty v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 22 (Mad.) and Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. ACED [1980] 122 ITR 21 (SC) it s clear that the interest on enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act could not be taken to have accrued on the date of the order of the Court granting enhanced compensation but had to be taken as having accrued year after year from the date of delivery of possession of the lands till the date of such order.” 7. Respectfully f…

Tej Pal Singh, Bulandshahr vs. ITO, Bulandshahr

In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed

ITA 6358/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…the hands of the assessee is not exempt u/s 10(37) of the Act. I have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as relied by the ld. Advocate of the assessee, in the case of Khorshed Shapoor Chenai (Mrs.) vs. Collector of Estate Duty (Asst.) – 122 ITR 21. I noted that this decision is not applicable in the facts of the case before me. In that case, the question involved was entirely different. The question relates to the passing of the right to receive the compensation on the death of the deceased. There was no question that if anybody buys the right to receive the compensation. These rights will…

Smt. Kamlesh, Bulandshahr vs. ITO, Bulandshahr

In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed

ITA 5571/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…the hands of the assessee is not exempt u/s 10(37) of the Act. I have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as relied by the ld. Advocate of the assessee, in the case of Khorshed Shapoor Chenai (Mrs.) vs. Collector of Estate Duty (Asst.) – 122 ITR 21. I noted that this decision is not applicable in the facts of the case before me. In that case, the question involved was entirely different. The question relates to the passing of the right to receive the compensation on the death of the deceased. There was no question that if anybody buys the right to receive the compensation. These rights will…

Smt. Madhubala Singh, Bulandshahr vs. ITO, Bulandshahr

In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed

ITA 5570/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…the hands of the assessee is not exempt u/s 10(37) of the Act. I have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as relied by the ld. Advocate of the assessee, in the case of Khorshed Shapoor Chenai (Mrs.) vs. Collector of Estate Duty (Asst.) – 122 ITR 21. I noted that this decision is not applicable in the facts of the case before me. In that case, the question involved was entirely different. The question relates to the passing of the right to receive the compensation on the death of the deceased. There was no question that if anybody buys the right to receive the compensation. These rights will…