← All Phrases

“compulsory acquisition”

Capital GainsSection 45(5)Section 45(5)516 judgments

The decision most relied on for compulsory acquisition is CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) (315 ITR 1), cited in 363 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on compulsory acquisition

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

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.

Mahender Pal Narang v. CBDT
161 Taxmann.com 301 · 2024 · High Court
178
citing judgments

Interest received as enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for compulsory acquisition of land is taxable as "income from other sources" under Sections 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and is not exempt under Section 10(37).

Movaliya Bhikhubhai Balabhai v. ITO TDS
388 ITR 343 · 2016 · High Court
128
citing judgments

Interest paid on compensation or enhanced compensation for compulsory acquisition of land forms part of the compensation itself and is not taxable as interest income under section 56(2)(viii) or section 145A.

Sham Lal Narula (Dr.) v. CIT
53 ITR 151 · 1964 · Supreme Court
100
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on enhanced compensation does not form part of the compensation itself but is taxable as 'income from other sources', analogous to interest under Section 34 of the Act.

(supra), Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 408 · 1990 · Supreme Court
84
citing judgments

Interest received on delayed payment or enhanced compensation awarded under compulsory acquisition is a revenue receipt and is liable to income tax.

Shri Manjeet Singh HUF v. UOI & Others in CWP No. 15506 of 2013; Shri Puneet Singh vs. CIT
110 Taxmann.com 116 · 2019 · Reported
83
citing judgments

Interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation from compulsory acquisition of land is taxable under the head 'Income from other sources' in the year of receipt, as per the amended provisions, with a 50% deduction available under section 57(iv).

Bikram Singh v. Land Acquisition Collector
224 ITR 551 · 1997 · Supreme Court
75
citing judgments

Interest received as income on delayed payment of compensation under Sections 28 or 31 of the Land Acquisition Act is a taxable revenue receipt, chargeable to income tax under the head 'income from other sources'.

CIT v. Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd.
161 ITR 524 · 1986 · Supreme Court
71
citing judgments

Income does not arise or accrue when the right to receive payment or compensation is inchoate, contingent, or in dispute, as such a right does not create a debt. This principle determines the correct year of taxability, particularly for compensation under litigation.

Judgments citing compulsory acquisition

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota vs. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd, Kota

ITA 1090/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT &
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

capital gains tax, since an amalgamation does not involve exchange or relinquishment of the assets or the amalgamation of any right therein or the compulsory acquisition under any law. It does not involve any exchange either within the legal meaning of that term. Thus merger does not involve an exchange ... capital asset, includes,- 1. The sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset; or 2. The extinguishment of any rights therein, or 3. The compulsory acquisition thereof under any law; or (iv)...." Thus, upon merger of CFCL Technologies into CFCL Ventures, CFCL's investment in shares of CFCL Technologies will

Lal Chand, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4479/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 4479/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Lal Chand, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca R.S. Poonia, Ward-1(4), D-83-B, Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Gurugram, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur-302015 Haryana-122016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agkpl7795F Assessee By: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.08.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Devendra Kumar, Noida vs. Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5784/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Davendra Kumar, Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Vs. H. No. 52, Vill. Barola, Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sector 49, Noida, U.P. Delhi Pin: 201 301 Pan: Caipk0485M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

Without prejudice to the above, that the AO/CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in holding that payment received on account of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land constituted revenue receipt taxable under the Act 3. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/CIT ... erred in not providing benefit under section 10(37) of the Act qua the receipt on account of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land. 4. In alternate and without prejudice to the above, the AO/ CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not allowing the statutory deduction under section

Kulwinder Kaur, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(5), Chandigarh

In the result, the impugned order of the Ld

ITA 595/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), No Effective Compliance Was Made In Response To The Statutory Notices Issued In The Appellate Proceedings. The Ld. Cit(A), Therefore, Proceeded To Dismiss The Appeal On The Ground Of Non-Prosecution, While Also Observing That In The Absence Of Any Written Submissions Or Evidences Filed, The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Could Not Be Entertained On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Lovesh Bansal, CA for Shri Ajay Jain, C.A (Virtual Mode)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. dR

Year 2017-18. 2. In the present appeal the assessee has challenged the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the gain arising on compulsory acquisition of immovable property as Short-Term Capital Gain amounting to Rs.12,67,605/-, whereas according to the assessee the same ought to have been

Balvinder Singh, Karnal, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Karnal, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4346/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Leelu Ram, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurugam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 896/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Leelu Ram, S/O-Mangal Singh, C/O-Ysr Gurugram & Associates, Plot No. 214, Basement, Sector-47, Haryana Pan: Apspr3189Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. M.R. Sahu, Ca Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Karnail Singh, Patiala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 4, Patiala

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1110/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1110/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Karnail Singh Ito-Ward-4 C/O Sandeep Goyal (Advocate) Patiala बनाम/ Vs. H. No. 1385, Sector 40-B, Punjab Chandigarh-160036. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Eybps-5925-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Peyush Pruthi (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27-03-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act On 06-09-2022. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 160 Days In The Appeal, The Condonation Of Which Has Been Sought By Ld. Ar.

For Appellant: Sh. Peyush Pruthi (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144

which has been sought by Ld. AR. 2. In the assessment order, Ld. AO brought to tax compensation received by the assessee on compulsory acquisition of assessee’s land by appropriate authority as well as interest received on such compensation. The assessee failed to make any submissions during assessment proceedings

Komal Adlakha, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Gurugram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3652/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Ito, Komal Adlakha, A06, Parsvnath Green Ville, Ward-2(2), Sohna Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Autpa5180C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, Ca Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Devinder Singh, Gurugram vs. ITO, Circle 1(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4782/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viti)Section 57

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Ravinder, Gurgaon vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4865/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Sukhwani Associaties, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 449/PUN/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Vardhaman L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

income under the head "Income from Business or profession". (b) Without Prejudice to above, the CIT(A) failed to appreciate that even if the compulsory acquisition of land is treated as exempt in F.Y.2016-17 then also no gain would have arisen in the year under consideration on sale ... deserves to be quashed. (c) On merits, it is contended that the assessee has received Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for the compulsory acquisition of land and value of compulsory acquisition of land is exempt but the assessee has not claimed the exemption in the year of receiving

Rejis Joseph, Ernakulam vs. ITO, Ward 3, Aluva

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/COCH/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 Rejis Joseph .......... Appellant Mookath House, Kottuvally, Koonamavu, Ernakulam. [Pan: Akcpr 3437 J] Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Aluva .......... Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

assessee claimed exemption u/s. 10(37) of the Income Tax Act, 2 Rejis Joseph 1961 (for short, 'the Act') for enhanced compensation received on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land of Rs. 52,63,811/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward-3, Aluva

Jai Bhagwan, Vpo Badshahpur, Gurgaon, Hr vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurgaon, Haryana

The appeal stands allowed and the concurrent findings of the AO and CIT(A) are hereby affirmed

ITA 3239/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrajai Bhagwan Vs. Income Tax Officer Vpo Badshahpur Income Tax Building Gurgaon Gurugram- 122001 Haryana-122001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amapb8989P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 2Section 28Section 4Section 56

fact, the assessee received interest on enhanced compensation from Land Acquisition officer Gurgaon amounting to Rs.182,04,310/- on account of compulsory acquisition of appellants agricultural land by the Government of Haryana in Financial Year 2008-09 but the same was not declared in the return filed by the assessee

Stylam Industries Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, TDS, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1152/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ravinder Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234E

amount paid in respect of enhanced compensation to be paid to the Haryana Govt, as per the award of the Court arising of the compulsory acquisition proceedings. The appellant was under a Bonafide belief that since the entire consideration charged by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation

Income Tax Officer Ward-28(5), Delhi vs. Rajender, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3477/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Income Tax Officer, Shri Rajender, Ward 28(5), Room No. 1202, 448, Chauhan Mohalla, Block E, Civic Centre, Vs Madanpura Khadar, Sarita Delhi 110002 Vihar, Delhi - 110076 Pan- Avqpr9368B Revenue Assessee Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Om Prakash Tiwari, Ca Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am, This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A), In Short], Dated 30.04.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2017-18/10229136 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dt. 20.03.2023 Passed U/S 147/144 Of The Act.

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69

further submitted by ld. AR that assessee had received compensation of Rs. 3,18,04,208/- from the State Government of Haryana towards compulsory acquisition of agricultural land in terms of Gazette notification No. 3212-R-2010 dated 09.12.2010 and compensation was received by award No. 25 dated ... remand back the matter to the file of AO. It is undisputed fact that assessee is an agriculturist and received compensation on the compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Government of Haryana, which was received in the year 2016. It is also established by the assessee that the amount

Radhey Shyam Saini, Hisar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2359/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15 Vs. Pcit, Sh. Radhey Shyam Saini, H. No. 1174/334, Rohtak Ramlila Chowk, Hisar, Haryana Pan: Bxhps4356Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Kuldeep Khera, Ca Sh. Mohit Girdhar, Ca Department By Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15, Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [In Short, The “Pcit”], Rohtak’S Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023- 24/1062878555(1), Dated 18.03.2024 Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing That The Sole Substantive Issue Between The Parties Is That Of Correctness Of The Learned Lower Authorities Action Assessing The Assessee’S Interest Component Of Land Acquisition Compensation U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, While Invoking Section 57(Iv) R.W.S. 56(1)(A) R.W.S. 145A(B) Of The Act. 3. Learned Sr. Dr Representing The Department Vehemently Argued That The Instant Issue Is No More Res Integra In Light Of Mahender Pal Narang Vs. Cbdt (2020) 423 Itr 13 (P&H) As Well As Pcit Vs. Inderjit Singh Sodhi Huf (2024) 161 Taxmann.Com 301 (Del.) Wherein The Department Has Succeeded Before Their Lordships That The Impugned Interest Component Ought To Be Assessed As Income From “Other” Sources Only. 4. We Have Given Our Thoughtful Consideration To The Assessee’S Pleadings & Revenue’S Foregoing Vehement Contention. It Emerges That This Tribunal’S Recent Decision In Pawan Kumar Vs. Pcit (2024) 159 Taxmann.Com 61 (Del.-Trib.) Has Distinguished The Said Case Law As Under:

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Shammi Nagpal HUF, Hisar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2358/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Pcit, Shammi Nagpal Huf, H. No. 7, Sector-13, Hissar, Rohtak Haryana Pan: Aazhs3505D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Kuldeep Khera, Ca Sh. Mohit Girdhar, Ca Department By Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14, Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (In Short “The Pcit”), Rohtak’S Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023- 24/1062887031(1), Dated 19.03.2024 Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing That The Sole Substantive Issue Between The Parties Is That Of Correctness Of The Learned Lower Authorities Action Assessing The Assessee’S Interest Component Of Land Acquisition Compensation U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, While Invoking Section 57(Iv) R.W.S. 56(1)(A) R.W.S. 145A(B) Of The Act. 3. Learned Sr. Dr Representing The Department Vehemently Argued That The Instant Issue Is No More Res Integra In Light Of Mahender Pal Narang Vs. Cbdt (2020) 423 Itr 13 (P&H) As Well As Pcit Vs. Inderjit Singh Sodhi Huf (2024) 161 Taxmann.Com 301 (Del.) Wherein The Department Has Succeeded Before Their Lordships That The Impugned Interest Component Ought To Be Assessed As Income From “Other” Sources Only. 4. We Have Given Our Thoughtful Consideration To The Assessee’S Pleadings & Revenue’S Foregoing Vehement Contention. It Emerges That This Tribunal’S Recent Decision In Pawan Kumar Vs. Pcit (2024) 159 Taxmann.Com 61 (Del.-Trib.) Has Distinguished The Said Case Law As Under:

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

Land Acquisition Act. The assessee responded vide letter (copy at pages 3-58 of Paper Book) that the assessee received enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land by Haryana Govt. of Rs. 6,86,17,767/- which included interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition ... year of receipt as per section 45(5) of the Act. However, in the case of an individual or HUF such capital gain from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land being capital asset is exempt from tax under section 10(37) of the Act. 6.4 The Ld. AR pointed

Jaswant Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 29(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 310/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 310/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaswant Singh,……………………………………Appellant 32/1A, Chakraberia Road South, Bhowanipore, Kolkata-700025, W.B. [Pan:Adnps0407P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-29(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Dakshin), 2, Gariahat Road, Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri L.N. Dash, Addl. Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

assessee that the ld. Addl./CIT(Appeals) has not provided sufficient opportunities to file the documents relating to compensation received by the assessee against compulsory acquisition of land by National Highways Authority of India. The assessee is entitled to claim exemption of the said compensation/income but the ld. Assessing Officer

Shri Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Baraiya, Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Circle- 4 (1) (1), Ahmedabad

ITA 685/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.685/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Bariya, Vs. Dcit Circle -4(1) (1), B M & Co, Old Vegetable Market, Aaykar Bhavan, Vejalpur, Surendranagar - 363001 Ahmedabad - 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anspb1144R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Rachna Khandhar, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05 / 05 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14 / 07 /2025

For Appellant: Rachna Khandhar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

assessee has shown business income and interest income from bank and other sources. Besides this during the year the assessee has received interest on compulsory acquisition of rural agricultural land by Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited in Land the interest received was divided among 12 legal heirs including the assessee

Karam Vir Yadav, Gurgaon vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC

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

ITA 2605/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmakaramvir Yadav, Vs. Assessing Officer, 1135, Sector 46, Nfac, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Abipy5863E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ranjan Chopra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 29.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2020-21 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Assessee Company, 1961. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr. Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Act, So Much So That, The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Do Not Satisfy The Statutory Twin Conditions Prescribed Under Section 263 Of The Act, Viz., (I) That The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28

cost + 30% Solatium+ Additional Cost 12%. I am enclosing order copy of Hon'ble Court for your record. This amount was enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of agriculture land (additional cost of my agriculture land). But TDS was wrongly deducted on full amount. 3. 10% TDS deduction is applicable ... wrongly deducted on full amount of enhanced compensation. 4. Sir, during the year, I had received Rs.2,91,34,541/- enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of agriculture land situated in Jasola 5 Village, New Delhi u/s 28 of Land Revenue Act. I had received enhanced agriculture land compensation Rs.2