“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

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

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

Narmail Singh, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Yamuna Nagar

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

ITA 699/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 699/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Narmail Singh, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Ward-5, Yamunanagar Yamunanagar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Dyhps5817P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 271Section 56(2)Section 57

filed his ITR for the A.Y. 2014-15. 2. Further, it is pertinent to mention here that the assessee had received interest on enhanced compensation amounting to Rs. 32,50,155/- and has not filed his ITR. In view of provisions of section 56(2) of the Income ... interest income on enhanced compensation was taxable after deduction @ 50% from the such receipts/interest income u/s 57(iv) of the Income tax Act, 1961, which would amount to Rs. 16,25,078/- (50% of 32,50,155/-). As the interest income of Rs. 16,25,078/- earned by the assessee

Narmail Singh, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamuna Nagar

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

ITA 698/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 698/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Narmail Singh, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Ward-5, Yamunanagar Yamunanagar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Dyhps5817P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 271Section 56(2)Section 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)

Assessing 1 Officer [In short, the ‘AO’] and revert the issue of chargeability of interest on enhanced compensation under section 56(2)(viii) of the Act back to the AO for completing the assessment afresh. 2. Following grounds of appeal were taken in the present appeal: - “1. That ... limited scrutiny on the issues of ‘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

Sandip Madhukar Mhatre, Uran, Dist, Raigad vs. Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, I.T.Department, Panvel

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

ITA 308/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.308/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sandip Madhukar Mhatre, Vs. Assessing Officer, House No.1193, Mulekhand, Assessment Unit, I.T. At Post Uran Telipada, Department, Panvel. Dist. Raigad- 400702. Pan : Aempm9754P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.01.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Hon. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Ex-Parte, For Alleged Non-Compliance To Appeal Notices, Inspite Of The Appellant Being Not Aware Of The Notices Issued & For This Reason The Order Dismissing The Appeal Was Not Justified & May Kindly Be Over Turned & Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 28Section 57

bringing to tax in the hands of the appellant, other co-owners share of interest received on delayed payment of enhanced compensation on acquisition of agricultural land, from Special Land Acquisition Office Metro Centre-1, Uran, not appreciating that appellant had only 25% share in such interest income. The addition ... Rs.6,39,18,952/- made by ld AO, by disallowing deduction claimed u/s 57, being the amount of interest received on delayed payment of enhanced compensation by Special Land Acquisition Office Metro Centre-1, Uran, not appreciating that even otherwise, the entire interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition

DCIT, Circle- 21(1), New Delhi vs. Ramprastha Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the revenue appeal stands dismissed

ITA 683/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

March 2014 (The photocopies of the pay orders issued by the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate, Haryana was filed before us.). Further, the enhanced compensation of Rs.8,69,69,677/-, on such acquisition by the HUDA, was received subsequently in the AY 2015-16. In the original ITR, the assessee

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

that the assessee‟s former addition of Rs.1,80,94,690/- represents his interest received u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on enhanced compensation. That being the case, we notice that the honourable jurisdictional high court‟s decision in (2019) 417 ITR 169 (Bom) Rupesh Rashmikant Shah ... under : “3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return declaring total 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

Dayalo Devi HUF, Panchkula vs. ITO, Ward-1, Panchkula

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

ITA 300/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.M. Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 23Section 250Section 28Section 57

Assessing Officer wherein an addition amounting to Rs. 1,52,36,040/- was made on account of amount received by the assessee as enhanced compensation alongwith the interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, as income from other sources, whereas the enhanced compensation and interest received ... Income Tax Act, 1961 on 26.03.2019 by the DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru assessing the total income at Rs.1,56,72,390/- by adding enhanced compensation and interest received for land acquisition. ITA 300/CHD/2023 A.Y.2017-18 3 4. Aggrieved with this addition, the assessee went in appeal before

Vipul Mahasukhlal Gopani, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 2

ITA 3726/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalvipul Mahasukhlal Gopani, A-3003, One Avighna Park, Mahadev Palav Marg, Lower Parel East, Mumbai – 400 012 Pan: Aaapg8761A ....... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 6(1)(1), Room No. 504, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Jayshree Menon, Ld. DR

Section 10Section 10(37)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250

subsequent to purchase, within a short span of time, the said lands were acquired and that they had received compensation, as well as, enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the assessments were reopened under section 147 after issuing notices under section 148. In response to the notices issued ... under section 148, replies were filed by the assessees. The Assessing Officer also collected information from the LAO regarding original, as well as, enhanced compensation received by the assessees on account of acquisition of the lands in question. After considering the reply on behalf of the assessees and the material

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)

under : “3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return declaring total 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 ... u/s.56(2)(viii) of the Act pertains to section 28 of the LAA. The assessee treated such amount as part of the enhanced compensation of land and claimed the same as exempt from tax on the ground that the land itself was agricultural. To buttress the contention that interest

Manmohan Singh Bhadana, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 2918/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Aabgina Chishti, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr. D.R

Section 2(14)Section 250

facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. A.O. treating the enhanced compensation as taxable income without appreciating that no interest was received and only enhanced compensation was received. 3.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances

Abdul Azeez Poolakkodan, Kottakkal vs. ITO Ward 1, Tirur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1006/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cochin19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Anil Kumar Dugarabdul Azeez Poolakkodan Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 Poolakkodan House Tharif Bazar, Opp. Town Hall Randathani P.O. Vs. Tirur 676101 Malappuram 676510 [Pan: Acppa2490P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 10(37)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 154Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)

record. 3.1 Sections 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv), applied by the AO in disallowing the assessee’s claim for exemption of interest on enhanced compensation from tax, which stand brought on the statute by Finance (No.2) Act, 2009, read as: 56. Income from other sources.— (1) Income of every ... income-tax under the head “Income from other sources”, namely:— (i) dividends; … (vii) (viii) income by way of interest received on compensation or on enhanced compensation referred to in clause (b) of section 145A; 57. Deductions.— The income chargeable under the head “Income from other sources” shall be computed after

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

short) 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 ... application u/s 154 of the act was moved by the assessee seeking deletion of addition made by CPC on account of interest received on enhanced compensation, which was rejected by the CPC vide its order dated 06.09.2019. The assessee preferred an appeal against the order dated 06.09.2019 before

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)

binding decision of Jurisdictional Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and Hon’ble Apex Court on the taxability of interest on enhanced compensation is factually incorrect, legally misconceived, contrary to the facts on record and wholly untenable. 8. That even the conclusion that “interest on enhanced compensation during the assessment ... income at Rs. 4,65,420/- on 28.08.2009 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

Sagardutt Builders & Developers Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT-Circle-22(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 4138/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshsagardutt Builders & Vs. Dcit, Developers Pvt. Ltd, Circle-22(1), 46, Second Floor, 100 Foota New Delhi Road, Village Ghitroni, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs9144E

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyaya, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 5

upholding addition to the extent of Rs. 5,01,84,718/- being aggregate of initial compensation of Rs. 1,11,59,149/- and enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,90,25,569/-received on acquisition of land by Government of India without appreciating the factual matrix of the case. (ii) That ... During the year under consideration, the assessee company received a sum of ₹5,01,84,718/- on account of enhanced compensation and interest of ₹2,24,15,375/- on enhanced compensation against acquisition of land in AY 2010-11 admeasuring 4.92230 acres located in Gurgaon by Govt. of Haryana. Similar

Aasmeen, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer, Noida

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

ITA 277/DEL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 57

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 44,43,550/- as interest on enhanced compensation by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances ... case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 44,43,550/- when interest on enhanced compensation is capital receipt. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

Liyakat, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer, Noida

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

ITA 276/DEL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 57

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 40,19,186/- as interest on enhanced compensation by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances ... case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 44,19,186/- when interest on enhanced compensation is capital receipt. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

Manohar Machhindra Thakur, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward 2, Panvel

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

ITA 1331/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G.D. Padmahshalimanohar Machhindra Thakur, Vs Ito, Ward-2, Panvel. Dhutum Uran, Raigad-400702 Maharashtra. Pan: Ajjpt 7526 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 20/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/03/2024 Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 31.10.2023 For A.Y.2019-20 As Per The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Ld.Ao Erred In Taxing & Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Amount Of Interest Received Of Rs. 5,17,55,606/- U/Sec. 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act & Thereby Erred In Taxing Rs. 2,58,77,803/- (After Giving 50% Deduction U/Sec. 57(Iv)). 2. Without Prejudice To Above, The Ld.Ao Be Directed To Consider Only My Share I.E. 1/5Th Only As Interest U/Sec. 28 & That Much Only Be Taxed After Giving 50% Deduction. 3. The Appellant Craves Its Right To Add To Or Alter The Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Case.”

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade, Addl.CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 57

order, as follows:- 2 Manohar Machhindra Thakur “5.5 I have perused the matter. Regarding the issue of interest on the enhanced compensation received by the appellant, the AO has rightly taxed the same as income from other sources based upon section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which

ITO, Ward-35(7), New Delhi vs. Sumitra Devi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 906/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2010-11 & Co. No. 173/Del/2022 Asstt. Year 2010-11 Ito, Ward-35(7), Vs. Smt. Sumitra Devi, New Delhi. Plot No. 132/133, First Floor, Pocket-12, Sector-24, Rohini, Delhi-110 085. Pan Craps6145R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 45(1)Section 45(5)(b)

case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,21,75,000/- ignoring fact that the amount of enhanced compensation is taxable under section 45(5)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that the enhanced compensation amount would invariably be subsequent ... Subsequently, on 29.05.2023 the Revenue has taken the following additional ground of appeal:- “The Ld. CIT|(A) failed to appreciate the amount of enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,20,87,825/- which was not taxed/declared by the assessee AY 2008-09, thereby the cost of acquisition was taken

Gulshan Kumar, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1676/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 203Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

binding decision of Jurisdictional Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and Hon'ble Apex Court on the taxability of interest on enhanced compensation" is factually incorrect, legally misconceived, contrary to facts on record and wholly untenable. 8. That even the conclusion that "interest on enhanced compensation during the assessment year ... amount of Rs. 2,85,259/- deducted by HUDA under section 194A of the Act on the interest of Rs. 2852590/- received as enhanced compensation on the compulsory acquisition of his agricultural land. He further found that in the return of income the assessee has claimed interest