“enhanced compensation”

Capital GainsSection 45(5)Section 45(5)344 judgments

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

Leading authorities on enhanced compensation

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.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya

91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court

205

citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

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).

CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bisnoi

296 ITR 292 · 2008 · High Court

145

citing judgments

An assessment order cannot be revised under Section 263 for being erroneous due to a perceived lack of enquiry if the Assessing Officer has already conducted an enquiry, applied their mind, and accepted the assessee's explanation.

Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.

6 SCC 121 · 2009 · Reported

140

citing judgments

This case establishes the principles for calculating compensation in motor accident and personal injury claims, including the selection of the multiplier based on the deceased's age, assessment of loss of dependency, consideration of future prospects, and deductions for personal expenses.

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.

MavaliyaBhikhubhaiBalabhai v. ITO (TDS)\n

70 Taxmann.com 45 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, forms an integral part of enhanced compensation and is not taxable as "Income from Other Sources" under Section 56(2)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Finance Act, 2009 amendments do not alter the compensatory nature of such interest.

Judgments citing enhanced compensation

Vachaspati Sharma, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1180/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

Section 10Section 10(37)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 18Section 234BSection 234DSection 28Section 45(5)Section 56

Land Acquisition Act 1894 of Rs. 4,78,95,440/- received by the appellant during the year, which was part of enhanced compensation for compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land exempt u/s 10(37) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances ... land situated at Badha in the district of Gurgaon which was acquired by the Government of Haryana for public interest. The assessee has received enhanced compensation including interest u/s. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 of Rs.4,78,95,44/- during the year as per the decision

Veena Rani (Legal Heir of Late Sh. Mahender Pal Narang), Fatehabad vs. Pr, CIT, Rohtak

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

ITA 1504/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2018-19 Veena Rani, Vs. Principal Commissioner (Legal Heir Of Late Sh. Of Income Tax, Mahender Pal Narang), Rohtak, House No. 221, Ward No. 9, Aayakar Bhawan, Shiv Chowk, Near Op. Mansarover Park, Gurdwara, Faridabad, Rohtak, Haryana-124001 Haryana-125050 (Pan: Alzpr5949K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv. & Sh. AnilFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pandey, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28

liable to be quashed. 7. That, the PCIT has erred in law and on facts in not accepting that the interest received on enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is exempt in the hands of the Appellant and as such the order of PCIT is erroneous ... which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The assessee has received Rs. 2,54,24,007/- as interest on enhanced compensation from HUDA after the compulsory acquisition of the agriculture land of the assessee, on which TDS @10% was also deducted. In the return of income in Schedule

Jai Singh Karwal, Hansi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1963/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 203Section 263Section 28

respect of the issue of taxability of interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act received as part of enhanced compensation, which was duly supported by judicial precedents and therefore, at best, could be said to be debatable issue ousting the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income ... short) accepting the return income. Subsequently, it was noticed that during the year, the Assessee has received interest on compensation or enhanced compensation from the Land Acquisition Officer, HUDA, Hisar, in lieu of compulsory acquisition of land as awarded by State Government under the Land Acquisition Act. Further on perusal

Ranjeet Singh, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Department, Na

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1678/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh.S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 Ranjeet Singh Vs. Income Tax Department Vpo Machghar, Ballabgarh, Faridabad Faridabad 121004 Pan No.Aezps4772C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 56Section 96

erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,42,15,095/- by applying section 56 (ii) of the income tax act for interest on enhanced compensation. 2. That having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(AO has erred in not applying the provisions section ... inherited land from his parents as an agricultural property. The land of the assessee was acquired by the Government and the assessee had received enhanced compensation of Rs.4,37,15,193/- including interest thereon amounting to Rs.2,84,30,196/-.The assessee has filed his return of income

Tejpal Singh Yadav, Noida vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Noida

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

ITA 835/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14 Tejpal Singh Yadav, Vs Ito, S.O. Bhora, Ward-3(5), Near Mata Mandir, Noida. Village-Rasulpur, Newada Sector-62, Noida (Uttar Pradesh) – 201 301. Pan: Alppt8514N

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH

Parammal Kadeeja, Randathani vs. Income Tax Officer (Ward 1), Tirur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 673/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhparammal Kadeeja The Income Tax Officer Poolakkodan House Ward (1), Tirur Randathani P.O. Vs. Malappuram 676510 [Pan: Ajpk2223K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None ------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

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

facts and circumstances of the case. 2 Parammal Kadeeja 2. The learned CIT(As) has failed to note the fact that the enhanced compensation and interest for the 1st year at 9% and 15% for the period subsequent to that, forms part of the compensation which is totally exempt from ... since the land acquired is agricultural in nature. 3. The Id. CIT(A) has gone wrong in bifurcating compensation and enhanced compensation as also interest u/s 28 of the LA Act 1894 thereon into taxable and non- taxable under the Income tax Act. 4. The Id. CIT(A) should have

Iyajool, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1)(5), Gautambudh Nagar

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

ITA 1857/DEL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 234ASection 28

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by treating an amount of Rs.25,17,933/- being 50% of interest of enhanced compensation of Rs.50,35,866/- received by the assessee from New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) on which TDS amounting to Rs.5,03,587/- was deducted, which ... being familiar with the income tax proceedings. It was further submitted that there was more than one claimant in respect of the interest on enhanced compensation amounting to Rs.50,35,866/- for which the assessee requested that the case may be set-aside to the file

Clint Martel Wilfred, Ernakulam vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal CIT (A) Bengaluru - 12, Bengaluru

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

ITA 59/COCH/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Clint Martel Wilfred Dcit (Interational Taxation) Clint Dale, Moolankuzhy Kochi Vs. Nazreth, Ernakulam 682002 [Pan: Abnpw6970H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 147Section 148

interconnected issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO on account of enhanced compensation and interest thereon received against land acquisition in the name his deceased father. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee ... explained that there was award passed by the court dated 6th 4. December 2006 in favor of his father late Shri Thomas Wilfred for enhanced compensation and interest thereon in proceeding under Land Acquisition Act. In consequence to such award, the impugned amount was remitted representing the enhanced compensation

Pallath Nafeesa, Malappuram vs. ITO, Tirur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

ITA 118/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Pallath Nafeesa The Income Tax Officer Poolakkodan House Tirur Athirumada, Punnathala Vs. Tirur, Malappuram 676552 [Pan: Alipn9300R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Paulose, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R

Section 10(37)Section 145ASection 194ASection 197Section 28Section 34Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The assessee before the learned CIT(A) made identical submission that the interest was received on enhanced compensation under section 28 of the Land Acquisition which is not taxable as income from other sources. However, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition ... learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The learned AR before us submitted that the interest on the enhanced compensation relates to the agricultural land which was not chargeable to tax and therefore the amount of interest cannot be made subject to the addition

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 127/LKW/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

adjudication without re-producing the provisions of section 194LA of the Act, it shall be purposive to state that, person paying any compensation or enhanced compensation to any resident on account of compulsory acquisition of immovable property (other than agricultural land) shall at the time of payment of such compensation

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 126/LKW/2023[2018-19 Qtr-1]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 125/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

Sujatabai Shesherao Bansode, Latur vs. ITO, Ward 4, Latur

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

ITA 950/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.950/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujatabai Shesherao Vs. Ito, Ward-4, Latur. Bansode, Bhim Nagar Atp & Tq Ahmedpur, Latur- 413515. Pan : Aplpb6172Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1] On The Facts & In The Circumstances The Learned Cit(A) Nfac Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Appeal On The Ground That The Reasons For Delay Are Not Found To Be Satisfactory. 2] The Learned Cit(A) Has & On Facts In Not Appreciating That The Reasons For Delay Were Beyond The Control Of The Appellant & Were Genuine For Which The Delay Ought To Have Be Condoned & Appeal Ought To Have Decided On Merits.

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade

Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 96

order was passed ex-parte u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer brought to tax the interest amount received on enhanced compensation of agricultural land. The assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC 3 belatedly and the same was dismissed ... appeal is not condoned. Further, the assessment was also completed ex-parte u/s 144 r.w.s. 147. The addition of interest on compensation or enhanced compensation amounting to Rs.5,13,013/- is fully confirmed u/s 56(2)(viii).” 5. From perusal of the above order, we find that the appeal

Hardev Raj, Sirsa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Sirsa

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

ITA 197/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 156Section 249(4)(b)

also erred both in law and, on facts in upholding an addition an addition of Rs. 84,38,290/- of interest received on enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land received u/s 28 of Land Compensation Act 1894 and eligible for exemption

Universal Tractor Holding Llc, Usa vs. DCIT, International Taxation Circle 3(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2216/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Durgesh Shankar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Neorem, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 49

Court held that interest under s. 28 unlike interest under s. 34 is an accretion to the value, hence it was a part of enhanced compensation or consideration which is not the case with interest under s. 34 of the 1894 Act. So also additional, amount under ... solatium under s. 23(2) of the 1961 (sic- 1894) Act forms part of enhanced, compensation under s. 45(5) (b) of the 1961 Act. In fact, this is reinforced by the newly inserted cl. (c) in s. 45(5) by the Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 1st April

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 255/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(37)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57Section 69ASection 80CSection 80D

legal warrant or valid justification on the part of learned AO to make addition of Rs 1,05,75,310/- being interest on enhanced compensation on acquisition of agriculture land U/s 28 of land Acquisition Act claimed as exempt in return filed. The action of learned AO is totally unlawful ... Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). who held that the interest was received on enhanced compensation on acquisition of land which is taxable under the head ‘income from other sources’ under section 56(2)(viii) r.w.s 145A(b) but directed the Assessing Officer to recomputed

Vaidya Srikantappa Sadashivaiah Srikanth, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore- 1, Bangalore

ITA 200/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45(5)Section 54

ITA No.200/Bang/2024 Vaidya Srikantappa Sadashivaiah Srikanth, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

Chandrakant Gordhanbhai Patel HUF, Dabhoi vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 485/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Final Hearing Of This Appeal Petition…”

For Appellant: None(Written Submission filed by the assessee)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

form of compensation of the land and interest on the compensation/ I.T.A No.485/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No. 5 Chandrkant Gordhanbhai Patel v. DCIT enhanced compensation cannot be taxed because the Hon'ble ITAT Delhi has held that interest received by the assessee on enhanced compensation for acquisition ... verified that said amount of interest is nature of receipts or otherwise. Whether the said amount of interest was actually received from the compensation / enhanced compensation on the sale of land. In absence of sale deed, court order or any other evidence, it is not proved that said interest income

Kaushlya Chaudhary, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Gurgaon, Gurugram

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1395/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 234BSection 28Section 56Section 57

Land Acquisition Act 1894 of Rs. 2,76,71,650/- received by the appellant during the year, which was part of enhanced compensation for compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land exempt u/s 10(37) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3. Without prejudice to the Ground No. 2 and without

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

returned 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