COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. M/S ROOP SINGH

ITA/522/2008

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which pertained to the taxability of enhanced compensation and interest received by the assessee, Sh. Roop Singh, HUF, for the assessment year 2000-01. The Tribunal had directed the Assessing Officer to decide on the taxability based on precedents set by the Supreme Court and a Special Bench. However, due to subsequent decisions by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 730217 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Rama Bai v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1990) 181 ITR 400, DCIT v. Padam Prakash, HUF (104-TTJ-989), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shri Prem Singh, ITA No. 85 of 2010, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Karambir Singh L/H of Late Shri Khushi Ram, ITA No. 283 of 2006, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Bir Singh (HUF) Ballabgarh, ITA No. 209 of 2004, Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula v. Prem Singh, decided on 16.12.2010, Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh v. Union of India and others, CWP No. 15506 of 2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: TAJENDER JOSHI
• Keywords: Assessment; Enhanced compensation; Income tax appellate tribunal; Interest; Return of Income; Taxability
• Section: 148; 143(3); 260A

Judgement Text

"ITA No. 522 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 522 of 2008 Date of Decision: 7.8.2014 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ....Appellant. Versus Sh. Roop Singh, HUF ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH. PRESENT: Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I”, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 4603/DEL/05 for the assessment year 2000-01, claiming the substantial questions of law as mentioned in para 4 of the appeal. 2. The assessee received enhanced compensation along with interest thereon and had not filed its return of income. A notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 27.1.2003. The assessee filed its return of income on 23.3.2004 declaring the income at ` 7,83,460/-. The Assessing Officer framed assessment under Section GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.10.01 14:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh ITA No. 522 of 2008 -2- 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.3.2004 (Annexure A-1) at a total income of ` 12,89,630/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who vide order dated 19.9.2005 (Annexure A-2) partly allowed the appeal. The revenue challenged the said order (Annexure A-2) in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure A-3) partly allowed the appeal and directed the Assessing Officer to decide the taxability of enhanced compensation and interest as per the decision of the Apex Court in Rama Bai v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1990) 181 ITR 400 and the observations of the Special Bench in DCIT v. Padam Prakash, HUF (104-TTJ-989). Hence, the present appeal. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. In view of the subsequent decisions of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shri Prem Singh, ITA No. 85 of 2010, decided on 5.7.2010, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Karambir Singh L/H of Late Shri Khushi Ram, ITA No. 283 of 2006, decided on 24.8.2010, Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Bir Singh (HUF) Ballabgarh, ITA No. 209 of 2004, decided on 27.10.2010, CM Nos. 27928-29-CII of 2010 in ITA No. 85 of 2010 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula v. Prem Singh, decided on 16.12.2010 and Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh v. Union of India and others, CWP No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14.1.2014, the matter is required to be remanded to the Tribunal to adjudicate the issue afresh in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and the order dated 12.9.2007 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Tribunal is set aside and GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.10.01 14:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh ITA No. 522 of 2008 -3- the matter is remitted to the Tribunal to decide afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent-assessee. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 7, 2014 (FATEH DEEP SINGH) gbs JUDGE GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.10.01 14:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh "