← 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

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. 9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4600/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

this article, the term "alienation" means the sale, exchange, transfer, or relinquishment of the property or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law in force in the respective Contracting States. 010. If the nature of transaction of the appellant company with the Mauritius

9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 16(1), Mumbai

ITA 3606/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

this article, the term "alienation" means the sale, exchange, transfer, or relinquishment of the property or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law in force in the respective Contracting States. 010. If the nature of transaction of the appellant company with the Mauritius

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. 9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 7477/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

this article, the term "alienation" means the sale, exchange, transfer, or relinquishment of the property or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law in force in the respective Contracting States. 010. If the nature of transaction of the appellant company with the Mauritius

9X Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

ITA 7052/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Riddhi Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 14ASection 35D

this article, the term "alienation" means the sale, exchange, transfer, or relinquishment of the property or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law in force in the respective Contracting States. 010. If the nature of transaction of the appellant company with the Mauritius

Bharat Bhushan, Karnal Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karnal

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2715/DEL/2023[218-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 10(37)(i)Section 28

interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to LA Act) from Government, on delayed Award of compensation on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land, is taxable as income of the assessee from other sources. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that

Ashwani Kumar, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1728/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.R Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 10(37)(i)Section 28

interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to LA Act) from Government, on delayed Award of compensation on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land, is taxable as income of the assessee from other sources. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that

Hasmukhbhai Kadvabhai Ramani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(3)(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 570/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.570/Srt/2023 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Hybrid) Hasmukhbia Kadvabhai Ramani Income Tax Officer, P.No.180 Shantivan Society, Nr. Ward-2(3)(2), Surat, Vs Jakat Naka, Sarthana Jakat Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Naka, Surat-395006 Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No: Ajjpr 0148 L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 10(27)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)

record perused. The Ld.AR for the assessee submits that during the relevant financial year under consideration, the assessee received compensation on account of compulsory acquisition of assessee’s rural agricultural land by Government of Gujarat. The assessee received enhanced compensation as well as compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Collector. Initially ... 26AS. In response to show cause, the assessee filed his reply and contended that he has received interest on delayed compensation on account of compulsory acquisition of his rural agricultural land acquired by the Government of Gujarat. The interest income received by assessee does not fall under the head “income

Sreeni Parameswaran, Ernakulam vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi

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

ITA 186/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dassreeni Parameswaran Asst. Cit, 7/42 – B5, Mystic Bells Corporate Circle- 2(1) Villa No. 1, Eroor Desom Kochi Nadama Village Vs. Ernakulam 682308 [Pan: Bahps6202C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. K. Krishna, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per:Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Order Dated 20.01.2023 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac), Dismissing His Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act") Dated 28.03.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12. 2. The Only Issue Arising In The Instant Appeal Is The Validity Or Otherwise In Law, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Of The Addition By Way Of Deemed Dividend U/S. 2(22)(E) Of The Act For Rs. 62,44,215,Since Confirmed In The First Appeal.

For Appellant: Ms. K. Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 2(22)(e)

shall include all profits of the company up to the date of liquidation, but shall not, where the liquidation is consequent on the compulsory acquisition of its undertaking by the Government or a corporation owned or controlled by the Government under any law for the time being in force, include

Sh. Parmanand Sisodiya, Indore vs. ITO-1(2), Indore

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

ITA 202/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Parmanand Sisodiya, Ito, Flat No.404-405, Ax-18-C, 1(2), Satyamitra Paradise, Indore. Scheme No.71, Gumasta Vs. Nagar, Indore. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Alops1416K Assessee By Shri S.S.Solanki, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

Section 54Section 54B

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

Madanlal Lodha, Raipur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 32/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: Ita 32/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years:2017-18) Madanlal Lodha, V Pr. Commissioner Of Income Ta, C/O M/S Prakash Trading Comp. S Raipur-(I) Shop No. 109 & 110, Textile Market, Pandri, Raipur, (C.G.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri S.K. Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03-08-2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 96

illegal, arbitrary, and not sustainable. 2 ii). Ld. Pr. CIT erred in setting aside the issue of taxability of capital gain arising on compulsory acquisition of land of appellant. The capital gain is not liable to tax and Ld. PCIT failed to appreciate the evidence filed and the correct position ... PCIT for invoking the provisions of revisionary proceedings u/s 263. The specific question asked under question no. 18 was “details of compensation received on compulsory acquisition of immovable properties during the year along with computation of capital gain/ loss.” Ld. AR also has shown us the reply submitted towards

DCIT- 3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2588/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

Ground No. 9 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to claim for exemption of long term capital gains arising on compulsory acquisition of land, as per section 96 of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The capital gain ... arising on compulsory acquisition of land was Rs.57.77 lakhs in AY 2017-18 and Rs.23.98 crores in AY 2018-19. During the course of hearing, the Ld A.R submitted that the correct amount of capital gain in AY 2017-18 is Rs.1,94,22,297/-. 10.1 This

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2587/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

Ground No. 9 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to claim for exemption of long term capital gains arising on compulsory acquisition of land, as per section 96 of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The capital gain ... arising on compulsory acquisition of land was Rs.57.77 lakhs in AY 2017-18 and Rs.23.98 crores in AY 2018-19. During the course of hearing, the Ld A.R submitted that the correct amount of capital gain in AY 2017-18 is Rs.1,94,22,297/-. 10.1 This

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2318/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

Ground No. 9 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to claim for exemption of long term capital gains arising on compulsory acquisition of land, as per section 96 of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The capital gain ... arising on compulsory acquisition of land was Rs.57.77 lakhs in AY 2017-18 and Rs.23.98 crores in AY 2018-19. During the course of hearing, the Ld A.R submitted that the correct amount of capital gain in AY 2017-18 is Rs.1,94,22,297/-. 10.1 This

Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2317/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

Ground No. 9 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to claim for exemption of long term capital gains arising on compulsory acquisition of land, as per section 96 of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The capital gain ... arising on compulsory acquisition of land was Rs.57.77 lakhs in AY 2017-18 and Rs.23.98 crores in AY 2018-19. During the course of hearing, the Ld A.R submitted that the correct amount of capital gain in AY 2017-18 is Rs.1,94,22,297/-. 10.1 This

Indium IV (Mauritius) Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Comm. of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2423/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleindium Iv (Mauritius) Holdings Limited V. Dcit (International Transaction)-2(2)(1) Office 201, 2Nd Floor, Sterling Tower Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point 14 Poudriere Street, Port Louis Mumbai – 400 021 Mauritius Pan: Aacci4907P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 2(24)Section 45Section 92C

this article, the term "alienation" means the sale, exchange, transfer, or relinquishment of the property or the extinguishment of any rightstherein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law in force in the respective Contracting States." 5.4 As per para 4 of Article 13, Capital Gains of a Mauritius

Shri Amritpal Singh (Prop), Jalandhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- 1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 425/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 110Section 263Section 54D

furnished the proof of transfer deed executed by the assessee in favour Punjab Government through its local body department on a/c of the compulsory acquisition of the I.T.A. No. 425/Asr/2019 21 Assessment Year: 2014-15 undertaking for a total consideration of Rs.2,41,52,972/-. He also filed the copy

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.297/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Income-Tax, Circle-2, Surat, Vs. K-801, River View Heights, Room No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pedar Road, Mota Varachha, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Surat-394101 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb 0820 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin K Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69

note that section 2(47) of the Act defines ‘transfer’ in relation to a capital asset, which includes: sale, exchange, relinquishment, extinguishment, compulsory acquisition etc. In assessee`s case, the assessee is owner of the asset in the assessment year 2017-18, he did not sale his asset (land), hence

Shri Ranjeet Singh, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (1), Bathinda

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 91/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Digvijai Chaudhary, Sr. DR
Section 96

NFAC has erred on facts & law in rejecting the claim of exemption of the assessee from Long Term Capital Gains, arising from Compulsory Acquisition of Land under National Highway Act, 1956, by relying on Section 96 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, and clarificatory Circular No.36/2016 (F.No.225/88/2016- ITA.II), Dated ... NFAC has erred on facts & law in rejecting the claim of exemption of the assessee from Long Term Capital Gains, arising from Compulsory Acquisition of Land by relying on Circular No.36/2016 (F.NO.225/88/2016-ITA.II), Dated 25-10-2016 while recording the finding that the case of the assessee is covered

M/S Food Health Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA No

ITA 37/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 105Section 143(3)Section 263Section 96

effect is enclosed at Page No. 3 to 4. Hon'ble Chennai Bench of ITAT has held that not only the compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act but also its interest for delayed payment is exempt from income tax, even in case of corporate assessee ... untenable. Further reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Kerala HC in which it has been held that compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act is exempt from income tax. The judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge has been reaffirmed by the Division Bench

M/S Raipur Reality Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA No

ITA 36/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 105Section 143(3)Section 263Section 96

effect is enclosed at Page No. 3 to 4. Hon'ble Chennai Bench of ITAT has held that not only the compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act but also its interest for delayed payment is exempt from income tax, even in case of corporate assessee ... untenable. Further reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Kerala HC in which it has been held that compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act is exempt from income tax. The judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge has been reaffirmed by the Division Bench