“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

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

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

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

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

Ndtv Worldwide Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT 18(1), New Delhi

ITA 1180/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmandtv Worldwide Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Okhla Industrial Estate, Circle-18(1), Phase-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccn9121G

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, Ms Tanya &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep K Mishra &

Section 1Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3

capital asset, transfer includes the NDTV Worldwide Ltd sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law. The concept of sale of an immovable property which is included in the expression ''capital asset' as defined under Section

Dara Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3697/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2019-20 With Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sh. Dara Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 270, Village & Post Ward-1(4), –Khandsa, Gurgaon, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan :Fhdps0289C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 270ASection 28Section 57

income - a. Rs. 4,19.71,070/-on account of interest u/s 28 of the land acquisition Act, received as part of enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land denying exemption due u/s 10(37) of the Act: b. without prejudice to the foregoing the act of charging ... account of interest u/s 28 of the land acquisition Act. received as part of enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land without allowing the relief due u/s 57 (iv) of the Act: c. Rs.1,50,000/- on account of deduction claimed under chapter-VIA; The above actions being

Dara Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3696/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 270ASection 28Section 57

Veena Shah, Panipat vs. Pr CIT, Rohtak

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1222/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 10(37)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

income from Other Sources’ and ‘Refund Claim’. During the relevant year, the appellant/assessee received interest on enhanced compensation of Rs.7,63,50,616/-, on compulsory acquisition of the agricultural land, from the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. The appellant/assessee had claimed the above- mentioned sum of Rs.7 ... assessment order passed by the AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue if the interest on compensation or enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land received by the appellant/assessee is taxable income from other sources under Section 56(2)(viii) of the Act. 7. At the outset

M/S. Sjs Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234B

justified, rather grossly erred by adding income under Business and Profession amounting to INR 1,50,87,482 relating to compensation towards compulsory acquisition of land. 7. The Ld. AO was not justified and rather grossly erred in calculating excessive interest under section 234B and 234C

V.S. Chandra Shekar vs. ACIT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 243/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Sheshachala, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 2(47)Section 48Section 50CSection 53A

capital asset, includes, — (i) the sale63, exchange63 or relinquishment63 of the asset; or (ii) the extinguishment of any rights therein63; or (iii) the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law; or (iv) in a case where the asset is converted by the owner thereof into, or is treated

Sh. Sher Singh, Alwar vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Alwar

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

ITA 629/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54F

NFAC has erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of AO in computing the long term capital gain on compulsory acquisition of agriculture land by UIT, Alwar at Rs.3,66,100/- as against Rs.12,850/- computed by the assessee by computing the indexed cost of acquisition ... against Rs.4,31,750/- claimed by the assessee. He has further erred in not considering the fact that capital gain arising on compulsory acquisition of agriculture land is exempt u/s 10(37) of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts

Shivdeeep Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 484/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 50C

building or both' is well recognized under the Act. Section 54D of the Act deals with certain cases in which capital gains on compulsory acquisition of land and building is charged to tax. Section 54D(1) of the act opens with: "Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), where ... capital gain arises from the transfer by way of compulsory acquisition under any law of a capital asset, being land or building or any right in land or building, forming part of an industrial undertaking…..". Thus, it is palpable from section 54D of the Act that 'land or building

Goodwill Constructions, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3233/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Parwani, Sr. DR

Section 142A(1)Section 43C

land or building or both' is well recognized under the IT Act. Sec. 54D deals with certain cases in which capital gain on compulsory acquisition of land and building is charged. Sub-s. (1) of S. 54D opens with 'subject to the provisions of sub-s. (2), where the capital

Soniya David Lathika, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram

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

ITA 667/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Soniya David Lathika The Ito, Ward-2(3) S. S. Nivas, Vizhinjam, Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar, Vs. Mukkola, Venganoor, Trivandrum-4 Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan/Gir No. Ajqpl 8228 A (Assessee) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Adarsh BFor Respondent: 13.03.2024

Section 10(37)Section 250

appellant. The appellant's claim is based on her understanding and belief that the transfer of her land to VISL amounted to compulsory acquisition. 3. According to the Assessing officer the property was sold to VISL through a sale deed and since on the date of transfer, the property ... circumstances explained in the attached 'Statement of Facts' , even though the transfer was by the way of sale deed it was in effect a compulsory acquisition by the Government 5. It is clear that the appellant did not have any choice but to transfer the land to VISL. Even

Shri Rangasamy Sekar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle-17(1), Chennai

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

ITA 379/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.379/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Rangasamy Sekar, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 76, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 083. Non Corporate Circle 17(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aakps4106P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K.R. Sudersan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sudersan, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)(a)

dated 25.10.2016, which is placed at page 163 of the paper book, wherein, it was clarified that the compensation received from compulsory acquisition of land under the Act viz., Right to Fair Competition and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [‘RFCTLAAR Act’] is exempt from levy

Vidyavathi Manthravadi, United Kingdom vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(It and Tp), Hyderabad

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

ITA 295/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.292/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2013-14) Sivakama Sundar Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1372 N Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.295/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Vidyavathi Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1370 Q Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessees By : Ms. P. Chandini, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 28/05/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

For Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54Section 54E

capital asset, includes,— (i) the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset; or (ii) the extinguishment of any rights therein; or (iii) the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law; or (iv) in a case where the asset is converted by the owner thereof into, or is treated

Sivakama Sundar Manthravadi, United Kingdom vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(It and Tp), Hyderabad

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

ITA 292/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2024AY 2013-14

For Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54Section 54E

Samadhan Krushna Katekar, Raigad vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Raigad

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 426/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshaliनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Samadhan Krushna Katekar Vs. National 214, Narmada Krishna Niwas Faceless Dhutum, Jasai Uran – 400702 Assessment Maharashtra Centre Pan : Azrpk4713E Appellant Respondent

Section 250Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 96

income of Rs.42,370/-. He received enhanced compensation at Rs.38,19,709/- and interest u/s.28 of the LAA amounting to Rs.68,32,020/- on compulsory acquisition from The Special Land Acquisition Officer (MIW), Latur against the land 5 Samadhan Krushna Katekar situated at Village Khadgaon, Tq. Latur. In the column ... insofar as the issue under consideration is concerned. In that case, the Land Acquisition Collector deducted tax at source from compensation on account of compulsory acquisition of land and deposited the same with the exchequer. A writ petition was filed in the High court urging that no deduction

Narayan Singh Rajput, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

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

ITA 19/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarayan Singh Rajput Ito-1 Wardno.2 Jamniya Road Khandwa Mundi Punasa Vs. Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bripr0714A Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024

Section 144Section 148

were issued on my old address Gram Mohiniya Dham, Tehsil Khalwa, District Khandwa, Madhya Pradesh. However, I had to shift my residence due to compulsory acquisition of land by the Government being the back waters of river Narmada. My new address is Ward No.2, Talab Mohalla, In front of Degree

Kusum Jayram Thakur, Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Panvel

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1332/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: S/Shri CH Naniwadekar &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 28Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viii)

income of Rs.42,370/-. He received enhanced compensation at Rs.38,19,709/- and interest u/s.28 of the LAA amounting to Rs.68,32,020/- on compulsory acquisition from The Special Land Acquisition Officer (MIW), Latur against the land situated at Village Khadgaon, Tq. Latur. In the column of exempt income ... insofar as the issue under consideration is concerned. In that case, the Land Acquisition Collector deducted tax at source from compensation on account of compulsory acquisition of land and deposited the same with the exchequer. A writ petition was filed in the High court urging that no deduction

Mathaiyan Saravanakumar, Salem vs. ITO, Salem, Salem Tamilnadu

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 243/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.243/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Mathaiyan Saravanakumar Acit #1/92, Kailash Nagar 4Th Cross बनाम Circle-2(1) Brinvadan Road, Fairlands Salem. / Vs. Salem-636 016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Avdps-4253-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman (Fca) -Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman (FCA) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 43CSection 50CSection 56(2)(viib)Section 96

property to an extent of 76.41 cents acquired under the land acquisition act, which has been judicially settled that gains arising out of such compulsory acquisitions are not liable for taxation. The land was compulsorily acquired for Highways projects by The Land Acquisition Officer and District Revenue Officer, Tirupur ... circumstances of the case, the appellant has wrongly offered to tax a sum of Rs.45,91,310/- on capital gains arising out of compulsory acquisition of urban land which is exempt u/s 96 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which

Om Prakash, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1674/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh.Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Om Prakash Vs. Principal Cit 45 Matana Majra, Rohtak Fatehabad, Haryana Haryana Pan: Cmspp7173D Appellant Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 263

assessed the total income at Rs.1,93,65,172/- by making addition on account of interest received on enhanced compensation from HUDA after the compulsory acquisition of Agricultural Land of the assessee. In the return of income, the assessee claimed interest income of Rs.47,75,510/- as exempt and claimed ... made addition of Rs. 1,93,65,172/- on account of interest received on enhanced compensation from HUDA after compulsory acquisition of agriculture land of the assessee. An application u/s 154 of the Act was moved by the assessee seeking for deletion of addition made by the CPC on account

Jai Parkash, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1675/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2018-19 Jai Parkash, Vs. Principal Commissoiner Of Bhattu Road, Income Tax, Rohtak Near Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad – 125050 Haryana (Pan: Amypk5328D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

wherein he claimed refund of the TDs amount of Rs. 11,24,214/- received as enhanced compensation after the compulsory acquisition of his agriculture land. In the return of income in Schedule EI, he has claimed interest income of Rs. 1,12,42,410/- as exempt. The case

Sobhi Lal Saini, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-61(1), Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 167/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 271(1)(c)

assessee is that under bona fide belief, in the return of income, he had claimed exemption of capital gain earned on compensation received on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case I am of the considered view that no deliberate act of furnishing