HARRY TOWNSHIP LTD. ,CHANDIGARH V. ACIT , CC-20, DELHI

ITA 1798/DEL/2021

AI Insights

Harry Township Limited appealed against the orders of the CIT(A) and the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, which had added certain incomes as unexplained under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and treated the compensation received from land acquisition as taxable. The Tribunal examined the evidences provided, including Form J and agreements with cultivators, and found that the agricultural income was not substantiated by proper evidences. However, it accepted the exemption claim for the compensation received under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, overriding the Income Tax Act, 1961.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470418 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: Jagdish Arora vs ITO [2021] 127 taxmann.com 728, Madaparambil Varkey Varghese vs ACIT in WP(C). No.1908 of 2019 (Kerala High Court), ITO Vs. V.S. Promotors Ltd. in ITA No. 378/LKW/2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, RFCTLARR Act, 2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYA CHAUDHARY; JAYA CHAUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: ATUL NINAWAT; PRIKSHIT AGARWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Earning of tax free income; Initiation of penalty proceedings; Revision of order
• Section: 250; 263; 13; 194LA

Judgement Text

"ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G”BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1798/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Harry Township Limited, Sector-28-D, Chandigarh-160028. PAN-AACCH9834L vs ACIT, E-2, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi-110055. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Atul Ninawat, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT DR ITA No.1369/Del/2022 [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Harry Township Limited, 3046, Sector-28-D, Chandigarh-160002. PAN-AACCH9834L vs Pr.CIT (Central), Delhi-3. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Prikshit Agarwal, CA Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 03.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 19.02.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : Both appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.09.2021 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-31, New Delhi in Appeal No.573/19-20 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for the Assessment Year 2017-18 (in ITA No.1798/Del/2021) and order dated 30.03.2022 passed by Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Delhi-3in DIN & Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021-22/1042150274(1) u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 2 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the assessment order dated 25.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2017-18 (in ITA No.1369/Del/2022). 2. The issues are common, interlinked and similar in both appeals arising by the assessee for AYs 2016-17 and 2017-18. Hence, both appeals have been heard together and accordingly adjudicated by a common order. ITA No.1798/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2016-17] 3. Ground No.1 is general in nature, needs no separate adjudication. 4. Ground Nos. 2 to 4 are in relation to theaddition of INR 20,01,529/- made u/s 68 of the Act by holding the agricultural income as unexplained income of the assessee. 5. Brief facts leading to this issue are that the assessee is a company and having land on which agricultural income of INR 38,43,270/- was declared and claimed as exempt income. During the course of assessment proceedings, details of agricultural income were not filed therefore, the AO has treated the said income as unexplained and added to the total income of the assessee company u/s 68 of the Act. 6. In first appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has filed fresh evidences in support of the agricultural income as additional evidences alongwith prayer under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962. After obtaining the Remand Report from the AO, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the agricultural incomeis not substantiatedby proper evidences by the assessee. Further, the ld.CIT(A) observed that the cultivator who has carried out agricultural activity resides at ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 3 the place from where the lands owned by the assessee company are situated at a distance of more than 110 KMs and it is not possible for him to cultivate the lands situated at around 110 KM from his residence. He therefore, confirmed the addition. However, it was explained by the assessee that out of INR 38,43,270/-, a sum of INR 20,01,529/- pertained to the income from agricultural operations and remaining amount of INR 18,41,693/- is the amount of compensation received from compulsory acquisition of land owned by the assessee at Village-Sekhwan, Tehsil Zira. Accordingly, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the agricultural income of INR 20,01,529/- as unexplained income u/s 68 of the Act against which the present appeal is filed by the assessee before us. 7. During the course of hearing, Ld.AR of the assessee stated that the assessee has submitted the copies of Form J in the paper Book which are copies of the purchase vouchers of the dealers at Mandi and also filed their ledger accounts. He further submits that the payments were received though banking channel. It was submitted by Ld.AR for the assessee that the lands were given on sharing basis where assessee is having 2/3rd share in the gross receipt and the cultivator would get 1/3rd share of the gross receipts, out of which he has to incur all the expenditure related to the agriculturalactivities. A copy of agreement executed with cultivator was also placed on record. The Ld.AR for the assessee submits that the assessee with all plausible evidences has been able to establish that the agricultural income declared is genuine. With regard to the observation of the Ld.CIT(A) that certain lands were in the nature of commercial, it was submitted that no activity was carried out on such commercial lands and ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 4 the agricultural income declared is derived from the agricultural lands only. He therefore, submits that the addition made deserves to be deleted. 8. On the other hand, Ld.CIT DR for the Revenue submits that all the Forms J submitted were in the name of the Director of the assessee company and not in the name of the assessee-appellant. She further submits that the Shri Jagroop Singh who cultivates the land at Malakpur, District Mansa which is situated at 110 KMs therefore it is not possible for him to carry out agricultural activity day to day basis. She further supports the orderofthe lower authorities and prayed for the confirmation of the additions made. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee is having both types of land i.e. agricultural as well as commercial land and part of the lands were acquired by National Highway Authority of India (“NHAI”). The Ld.CIT(A) while confirming the additions,has observed that the assessee has not been able to clarify as to how the agricultural operations were claimed to have been carried out on commercial land. Before us also, the assessee could not be able to justify whether the agricultural income earned, were from the agricultural land and no commercial land was used for the same. Moreover, Form J submitted contained the name of the Director of the assessee company. All these facts need proper verification. Therefore, in the interest of justice, this issue is set aside to the file of the AO for making proper verification of the fact whether agricultural income is declared from the agriculturalpurposes carried out by the assessee on agricultural land or any commercial land is involved. The AO is further directed to verify whether Form J issued in the name of Director are related to the sale of agriculture produce by ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 5 the assessee or not. The AO is also directed to allow proper opportunity and assessee is directed to make proper compliance of the notice issued by the AO. 10. As a result, Ground Nos. 2 to 4 raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 11. Ground Nos. 5 & 6 are in relation to the addition of INR 31,31,903/- made and confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) on account of gain from the compulsory acquisition of land by holding the same as unexplained income of the assessee. 12. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is having lands at Village Sekhwan, Tehsil-Zira which were acquired by NHAI. After claiming the cost of acquisition, the assessee has declaredthe profit at INR 31,31,903/- and claimed the same as exempt income under Right to compensation and transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (“RFCTLARR Act, 2013”). Before the AO, the assessee has failed to file any details therefore, he made the addition of the same holding the same as taxable. However, before Ld.CIT(A), all necessary evidences were filed and Remand Report was called for. The Ld.CIT(A) has though accepted that the compensation received by the assessee is covered under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 however, by observing that in terms of section 105(3) of the said Act, no notification is issued by the Central Government whereby the benefit of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 is extended to the land acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956. He thus was of the opinion that the assessee is not entitled for exemption on the compensation received of the said land acquired by NHAI. He further observed that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 10(37) of the Act as the same is not available to ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 6 companies as well as in case of non-agricultural land. Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. 13. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submits that as per the section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, no income tax is leviable on the award made in this Act. The relevant section is reproduced as under:- 96. “Exemption from income-tax, stamp duty and fees-No income tax or stamp duty shall be levied on any award or agreement made under this Act, except under section 46 and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same.” 13.1. He further submits that section 105 stood was amended by Ordinance No.9 of 2014 wherein sub-section (3) of section 105 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 is superseded by a new section (3) wherein requirement of issuing notification was done away and therefore, enactments appearing in Fourth Schedule which contained NHAI are also covered under the provision of RFCTLARR Act, 2013. This amendment has come into operation from 01.01.2015. 14. Ld.AR submits that though one of the land acquisition order was issued on 04.02.2014 however, the compensation were received by the assessee starting from 09.09.2015 to 17.03.2016 and therefore, the amendment made in section 105(3) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 w.e.f. 01.01.2015 is applicable to the case of the assessee and there is no requirement to issue notification under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 where the land is acquired by the NHAI. He therefore, prayed that compensation received by the assessee on compulsory acquisition of the land ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 7 owned by it is eligible for exemption from Income-tax in terms of section 96 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013. 15. On the other hand, Ld.CIT DR for the Revenue supported the ordersof the authoritiesbelow and submits that the Ld.CIT(A) has already considered these facts therefore, order of Ld.CIT(A) deserves to be upheld. He further placed reliance on the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Agra, ITAT in the case of Jagdish Arora vs ITO [2021] 127 taxmann.com 728. 16. We have heard therival submissions and perused the material available on record. Before dwelling upon the issue, The relevant provisions as contained in section 96 and 105 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 needs to be considered which reads as under : 96. Exemption from income-tax, stamp duty and fees. “No income tax or stamp duty shall be levied on any award or agreement made under this Act, except under section 46 and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same Section.” 105. Provisions of this Act not to apply in certain cases or to apply with certain modifications. (1) Subject to sub-section (3), the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule. (2) Subject to sub-section (2) of section 106, the Central Government may, by notification, omit or add to any of the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule. (3) The Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, direct that any of the provisions of this Act ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 8 relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and Third Schedules, being beneficial to the affected families, shall apply to the cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule or shall apply with such exceptions or modifications that do not reduce the compensation or dilute the provisions of this Act relating to compensation or rehabilitation and resettlement as may be specified in the notification, as the case may be. (4) A copy of every notification proposed to be issued under sub-section (3), shall be laid in draft before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in disapproving the issue of the notification or both Houses agree in making any modification in the notification, the notification shall not be issued or, as the case may be, shall be issued only in such modified form as may be agreed upon by both the Houses of Parliament. 16.1. Sub-section 3 to Section 105 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 is substituted by the Ordinance No. 9 of 2014 w.e.f. 01.01.2015 and the relevant amendment in sub-section (3) to Section 105reads as under: (3) The provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accord acne with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule with effect from 1st January, 2015.” 16.2. It is thus clear that after the amendment in sub-section 3 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, precondition of issue of notification is withdrawn w.e.f. 01.01.2015. From the perusal of the order of Ld.CIT(A), we find that though the Ld.CIT(A) was ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 9 in agreement with the claim of the assessee that the provisionsof the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 are applicable to the present case and as per Section 96 of the said Act, the compensation so received is exempted from Income Tax. However, the Ld.CIT(A) by relying upon the old provision of sub-section (3) of section 105 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 has disallowed the claim for reason that no notificationwas issued by the Central Government in terms of section 105(3) of the Act. Therefore, only issue remained for our consideration is whether any notification as provided in section 105(3) is issued by the Central Government to this effect or not. 16.3. Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 provides exemption from income tax and stamp duty of the compensation received on compulsory acquisition made under this Act for public purposes. Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 states that provisions of this act shall not apply to enactments relating to land acquisition specified under Schedule Fourth (which includes NHAI Act also). However, as per amended sub-section 3 of section 105, the provisions of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with First schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in Fourth schedule of the said Act. Since NHAI Act is already included in Fourth schedule of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 thus exemption as provided in section 96 of the said act is available in cases where land is compulsory acquired by under NHAI Act for public purposes and the pre- condition of issue of notification to this effect has already been withdrawn through amendment in sub-section (3) of section 105 of the said Act. ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 10 16.4. One more aspect needs to be considered that certain portion of the land acquired was having commercial status and the lower authorities observed that the exemption is only available to the agricultural land. CBDT vide circular No. 36 of 2016 dated 25.10.2016 after considering the exemption provided u/s 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 towards the compensation award under this Act as tax free under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The relevant para 2 and 3 of the said Circular as under:- 2. “The RFCTLARR Act which came into effect from 1st January, 2014, in section 96, inter alia provides that income-tax shall not be levied on any award or agreement made (except those made under section 46) under the RFCTLARR Act. Therefore, compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act (except those made under section 46 of RFCTLARR Act), is exempted from the levy of income-tax. 3. As no distinction has been made between compensation received for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land and non-agricultural land in the matter of providing exemption from income-tax under the RFCTLARR Act, the exemption provided under section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act is wider in scope than the tax-exemption provided under the existing provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. This has created uncertainty in the matter of taxability of compensation received on compulsory acquisition of land, especially those relating to acquisition of non-agricultural land. The matter has been examined by the Board and it is hereby clarified that compensation received in respect of award or agreement which has been exempted from levy of income-tax vide section 96 of RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income-tax Act, 1961.” ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 11 16.5. Thus vide this Circular, CBDT clarified that award granted under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 both for agricultural and non-agricultural land is tax free.Therefore, the compensation received by the assessee on compulsory acquisition of its land, both commercial and agricultural land, by NHAI is eligible for exemption from income tax as per the provisions of section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 which is a special Act and prevail over the Income Tax Act, 1961. This view gets support from the judgement of co-ordinate bench of ITAT Lucknow in the case of ITO Vs. V.S. Promotors Ltd. in ITA No. 378/LKW/2020 wherein vide order dated 20.02 2023 it is held as under: 4.1. “After considering submissions made by the assessee in respect of Section 96 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 read with CBDT Circular no. 36/2016 and by placing reliance on decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Madaparambil Varkey Varghese vs. ACIT in WP(C). No.1908 of 2019 (Kerala High Court), ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by ld. AO. Findings given by ld. CIT(A) in this respect are reproduced as under:- “The only objection of the AO is that the exemption is not available to the appellant as it is a Company which is not covered in the definition as contained in sec. 10(37) and is only available to assessees having status of Individual or HUF. Further according to the AO exemption is also not available to the appellant Company as the Circular has not stated to extend the exemption to all categories of assessees. On perusal of section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 it is seen that as per the same it states that no income tax or stamp duty shall be levied on any award or agreement made under this Act, except under section 46 and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same. Further the Circular No. 36 of 2016 issued by the CBDT in para 3 states that the exemption provided under section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act is wider in scope than ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 12 the exemption provided under the existing provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is seen that the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 is a Special Law and that Special Law should prevail over-the General law. Moreover, it is true that under any statue where there is special as well as general provision special provision always prevails. This aspect has been well recognised by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases  CIT v. Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd. [2007] 161 Taxman 181,291 ITR 370 (SC)  Britannia Industries Ltd, v. CIT [2005] 148 Taxman 468, 278 ITR 546 (SC)  UOI v. AzadiBachao Andolan [2003] 132 Taxman 373, 263 ITR 706 (SC)  General Insurance Corpn. of India v. CIT [1999] 106 Taxman 389, 240 ITR139 (SC). The AO's objection regarding section 10(37) does not hold good as exemption has not only been claimed under section 10(37) of the IT Act, 1961 but also under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Section 96 of the \"RFCTLARR Act, 2013\" exempts awards from the levy of Income-tax under the I.T Act, 1961. Section 96 was enacted under the 2013 Act for making tax-free award granted to the land losers but there was no specific provision to treat such award as tax-free under the Income-tax Act, 1961. CBDT vide Circular No: 36 of 2016 Dated 25/10/2016 offers due recognition to the provisions of section 96 enacted under the \"RFCTLARR Act, 2013\" so as to treat award under the said Act as tax- free under the Income –tax Act, 1961. The operative Para 2 and Para 3 of the Circular No.: 30 of 2016, dated 25/10/2016 reads as under: ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 13 \"Para 2. The RFCTLARR Act which came in to effect from 1st January, 2014, in section 96, inter-alia, provides that income-tax shall not be levied on any award or agreement made (except those made under section 46) under the RFCTARR Act. Therefore, compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act (except those made under section 46 of RFCTLARR Act), is exempted from the levy of income-tax.\" \"Para 3. As no distinction has been made between compensation received from compulsory acquisition of agricultural land and non- agricultural land in the matter of providing exemption from income-tax under section the RFCTLARR Act, the exemption provided under 96 of the RFCTLARR Act is wider in scope than the tax-exemption provided under the existing provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961. This has created uncertainty in the matter of taxability of compensation received on compulsory acquisition of land, especially those relating to acquisition of non-agricultural land. The matter has been examined by the Board and it is hereby clarified that compensation received in respect of award or compensation has been exempted from levy of income-tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income-tax Act, 1961.\" CBDT Circular No. 36 of 2016, dated 25/10/2016 clarifies that in absence of specific provision under the Income-tax Act, 1961 award under the \"RFCTLARR Act, 2013\" in the hands of land losers, both for agricultural and non- agricultural land is tax free. In the case of Madaparambil Varkey Varghese Vs ACIT (Kerala High Court) WP(C).No.1908 of 2019 it was held by the Hon'ble court that \"Section 96 mandates that no income-tax shall be levied on any award made under the Act except under Section 46. Section 46 deals with the purchase of land by a person other than a specified person through ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 14 private negotiations. The benefit of Section 96 is not available when a land is purchased through private negotiations by a person other than a specified person under Section 46(1). Therefore, in cases other than those covered by Section 46 of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, the levy of income-tax is barred by Section 96 and as a consequence, the deduction or collection under Section 194LA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is impermissible\". It is further seen that according to section 96 of the said Act and also as per the Circular No. 36 of 2016 it is clear that exemption from Income-tax provided under section 96 of the \"RFCTLARR Act, 2013\", being special Act, prevails over the Income-tax Act, 1961. The RFCTLARR Act, 2013 also applies to all land losers, irrespective of their status. Further any award in any form made under this Act as defined under section 96 (except those covered under section 46) is exempt from income-tax both under normal and MAT provisions under the I.T Act, 1961. Thus the addition so made of Rs.5,10,29,003/- by disallowing the exemption is based on incorrect interpretation of the Act accordingly the same is directed to be deleted.” 17. Regarding the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Agra in the case of Jagdish Arora as relied upon by the Revenue, we find that the said judgement pertained to AY 2010-11 when the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 was not introduced and therefore, the said judgement was not applicable in the facts of the case of the assessee where the compensation is received by the assessee in FY 2015-16 which is fallen after date when the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 come into force. 18. Since the land owned by the assessee were acquired by NHAI as compulsory acquisition u/s 3A of NHAI Act, 1956 and compensation was awarded by the competent authorities. The entire amount compensation so ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 15 awarded was received by the assessee during the FY 2015-16 relevant to the assessment year under appeal, which is after the amendment made in section 105(3) w.e.f. 01.01.2015. Therefore, for claiming the exemption of the compensation under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 awarded by NHAI, there is no requirement of issue of any notification. Moreover, we have already expressed the view that exemption from the income tax on the compensation received upon compulsory acquisition of land by NHAI is available as per section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, therefore, in view of above discussion, the addition made of INR 31,31,903/- by disallowing the exemptions available to assessee is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, assessee get the relief of INR 31,31,903/-. Ground of appeal Nos. 5 & 6 of the assessee are allowed. 19. The other grounds are in relation to levy of interest which is mandatory and initiation of penalty proceedings which are consequential therefore, the same are dismissed. 20. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.1369/Del/2022 [Assessment Year : 2017-18] 21. During the course of hearing, both the parties have agreed that the facts of the present appeal are identical to the facts of the case of the assessee for AY 2016-17 wherein the land compensation money received from NHAI held as taxable by the lower authorities. In the present appeal also, Ld.Pr.CIT has held the order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and direct the AO to ascertain the income of the assessee received as compensation on compulsory acquisition of land which are claimed as exempted. ITA Nos.1798/D/2021 & 1369/D/2022 Page | 16 22. This issue is already been dealt by us in earlier part of this order in assessee’s appeal in ITA No.1798/Del/2021 for AY 2016-17 wherein we have already hold that the land compensation received by the assessee is exempted. Thus, following the same, this appeal of the assessee is allowed. 23. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1798/Del/2021 (AY 2016-17) is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1369/Del/2022 (AY 2017-18) is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) JUDICIAL MEMBER *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "