Section 56(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act

Kumar Satish, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Gurugram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Kumar Satish, Vs. Income Tax Officer, V.P.O. Basai, Ward-2(2), Distt. Gurgaon, Gurugram Haryana Pan: Blvps8413G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Rakesh, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurugram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Joginder Kumar Taneja, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 50(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Joginder Kumar Taneja, 108-109, Parmesh Business Ward 50(1), Centre-1, Plot No. 20, Income Tax Department, Community Centre Civic Centre, Minto Road, Karkardooma, Delhi-92 New Delhi- 02 Pan: Aaspk6590P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Prince Mohan Sinha, Adv. Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Sunil Kumar, Noida vs. Ward 5(2)(4), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sunil Kumar, Village-Sk-1, Gejha, Ward 5(2)(4), Range Code- Maharshi Nagar, Sector- 93, 104, Income Tax Department, Noida- 201304, New Delhi- 110002 Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Bklps1289M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Sanchita Jain & Sh. Rajat Gupta & Ms. Kanika Mittal, Advocates Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.08.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The “Cit(A)/Nfac”], Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074717352(1), Dated 19.03.202 Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In The Assessee’S Condonation Averments, Delay Of 387 Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal Is Condoned In Light Of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 Itr 471 (Sc).

Usha, Charkhi Dadri vs. Income Tax Officer, Charkhi Dadri

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Usha, House No. 82, Ward No. 13, Income Tax Department, Charkhi Dadri- 127306 Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Haryana- 127306 Pan: Agrpu2776L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Jai Kanwar, Sonipat, Haryana vs. ITO, Ward 1, Sonepat, Sonipat, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Jai Kanwar, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vpo -Rai, Near Telephone Sonepat Tower, Sonipat, Haryana -131 029 Pan: Aqwpk1933C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Phool Kumar, Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-3, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Dinesh Gupta, Gurgaon vs. Nwr W 107 1 Ward 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Sh. Dinesh Gupta, Vs. Nwr W 107 1, Krishna Nagar, Opp. Raghu Ward-3(1), Gas Godown, Basai Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Anlpg7849K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Raghuvir Singh, Haryana vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 3(1) Gurgaon, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Raghuvir Singh, Vs. Assessing Officer, H. No. 53, Near Shiv Mandir, Ward-3(1), Vill.- Darbaripur, Tehsil – Gurgaon Badshapur, Gurugram, Haryana – 122 001 Pan: Gusps8800Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Virender Singh, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21

Raj Kumar, Faridabad Palwal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21

Jitender Kumar, Delhi vs. National Faceless Apeeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Jitender Kumar, Vs. Nfac, Vpo Pandwala Kalan, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Bilpk4110R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Ar Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Rajesh Kumar, Gurgoan vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Krinwant Sahayassessment Year: 2020-21 Rajesh Kumar, Vs. Dcit, 4/178, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon Pan: Avepr2117E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Airik Singla, Adv. Department By Sh. Sudip Majumdar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2020-21, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The “Cit(A)/Nfac”], Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083175750(1), Dated 01.12.2025 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:

Munshi Ram Solanki, Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Sh. Munshi Ram Solanki, Vs. Nfac/Cit, Vill. - Dabri, Po – Palam, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Ayyps6169G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Tarun Sharda, Sr. Dr

Sarvjeet Rathi, Bahadurgarh vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Sarvjeet Rathi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, House No. 26/15, Ward-2, Bahadurgarh, Rohtak, Bahadurgarh, Haryana- 124 507 Haryana- 124 001 Pan: Anspr4928D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Hans Raj, Jhajjar Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year:2020-21 Hans Raj Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Raje Ram Vpo Goria New Delhi Tehsil, Matanhail, Jhajjar, Haryana Pan: Avepr19351 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Daya Ram Sukhala (HUF), Rohtak vs. ITO Ward-3, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Vs. Income Tax Officer Shri Daya Ram Shukla (Huf) Ward-3 83A/22, Kishan Pura, Zila Parishad Building Rohtak- 124001 Rohtak Haryana Haryana Pan: Aaihd7643E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Ca Department By Sh. Ravi Kant Chaudhary, Sr. Dr

Badam Singh Sukhala (HUF), Rohtak vs. I T O Ward -3, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Vs. Income Tax Officer Badam Singh Shukla (Huf) 83 C 22, Ran Singh Lane, Ward-3 Kishan Pura Zila Parishad Building Rohtak-124001 Rohtak Haryana Haryana Pan: Aajhb4611H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Ca Department By Sh. Ravi Kant Chaudhary, Sr. Dr

Dharmbati, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Inspector Faridabad, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2018-19 Dharmbati, Vs. Income Tax Inspector, H. No. 523, Chandawali, Faridabad Ballabhgarh, Faridabad Pan: Azipb6400G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.03.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The “Cit(A)/Nfac”], Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1077406804(1), Dated 23.06.2025 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Case Called Twice. None Appears At The Assessee’S Behest. He Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex-Parte. 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:

Satender Kumar, Sarita Vihar vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 229/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Satender Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, 56, Ali Village, Sarita Vihar, Ward-28(1), New Delhi-110076 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afxpk4995C Assessee By: None Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2020-21 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082434098(1) Dated 10.11.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).