Satish Wamanrao Honerao, Latur V. Income-tax Officer ,

ITA 2580/PUN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1384 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-04-2019
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Capital receipt
• Section: 28; 143(3); 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO. 2580 /P U N/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 3 - 1 4 SHRI SATISH WAMANRAO HONERAO, BANK COLONY, AHMEDPUR, LATUR 413515 . / APPELLANT PAN: AA FPH2007M VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD - 3, LATUR . / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO. 258 1 /P U N/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 SHRI ARUN WAMANRAO HONERAO, POCHAMMA GALI, LATUR 41351 2 . / APPELLANT PAN: AA EPH1479A VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 , LATUR . / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO. 2582 /P U N/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 SHRI PADMAKAR WAMANRAO HONERAO, POCHAMMA GALI, LATUR 413512 . / APPELLANT PAN: AAPPH0981E VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, LATUR . / RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2580 /P U N/20 1 6 & ORS SATISH W HONERAO & ORS 2 . / ITA NO. 258 3 /P U N/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 SHRI P RAMOD WAMANRAO HONERAO, BANK COLONY, AHMEDPUR , LATUR 41351 5 . / APPELLANT PAN: A IXPH9086L VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFIC ER, WARD - 3, LATUR . / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO. 258 5 /P U N/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 SHRI KAMLAKAR WAMANRAO PATIL , A/P DHANORA, TAL. AHMEDPUR, LATUR 41351 5 . / APPELLANT PAN: CBWPP1670A V S. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, LATUR . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHARAD SHAH / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUDHENDU DAS / DATE OF HEARING : 02 . 0 8 .201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 . 0 9 .201 9 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : TH IS BUNCH OF APPEAL S FILED BY RELATED ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDER S OF CIT (A) - 2 , AURANGABAD , ALL DATED 27 . 0 5 .201 6 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 3 - 1 4 AGAINST RESPE CTIVE ORDER S PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . ITA NO. 2580 /P U N/20 1 6 & ORS SATISH W HONERAO & ORS 3 2. THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS RELATING TO CONNECTED ASSESSEE ON SIMILAR ISSUE S WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CO NVENIENCE. HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES, WE MAKE REFERENCE TO THE FACTS AND ISSUES IN ITA NO.2580/PUN/2016. 3. THE PRESENT APPEALS WERE FILED AFTER THE DELAY OF 112 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONDONATION APPLICATION IN THIS REGARD AND HA S PLEADED THAT BECAUSE OF WRONG ADVICE OF CONSULTANT, APPEALS COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. HOWEVER, HE TOOK ADVICE FROM ANOTHER CONSULTANT AND HAS FILED THE PRESENT AP PEALS. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND MERIT IN THE P LEA OF ASSESSEE AND THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT SET OF APPEALS IS CONDONED AND WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEALS AFTER HEARING BOTH THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. 4. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ONLY ISSUE WHICH NEEDS TO BE DECIDED IN THE PRESENT SET OF APPEALS IS AGAINST CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST RECEIVED UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT (IN SHORT LAC ACT). THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE AWARD LETTER ITSELF TALKS OF SOLATIUM TO BE PAID @ 30% AND THE INTEREST CALCULATED UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT, WHICH TOTALS TO A LARGER AMOUNT BUT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE I.E. SATISH WAMANRAO HONERAO HAS ONLY RECEIVE D 31,48,770/ - . HE STRESSED THAT THE SAID INTEREST WHICH WAS THE PAYMENT UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT IS TO BE TREATED AS PART OF COMPENSATION AND IN LINE WITH THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS. GHANSHYAM (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC) A ND ALSO PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MADHAV PANDHARINATH KANDE VS. ITO IN ITA NO.2584/PUN/2016, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14, ORDER DATED 01.07.2019. ITA NO. 2580 /P U N/20 1 6 & ORS SATISH W HONERAO & ORS 4 5. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND, POINTED OUT THAT TH E ISSUE STANDS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS. CHET RAM (HUF) IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.13053/2017 & ORS. JUDGMENT DATED 12.09.2017 AND THE AMOUNT WAS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. 6. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE IN REJOINDER POINTED OUT THAT THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN CIT VS. CHET RAM (HUF) (SUPRA) TALKS OF THE YEAR OF TAXABILITY, WHICH IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE DISPUTE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS WHETHER INTEREST WHICH WAS RECEIVED UND ER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT IS TO BE TREATED AS PART OF COMPENSATION OR NOT? 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE LIMITED ISSUE WHICH ARISES IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS WITH LEAD APPEAL IN SATISH WAMANRAO HONERAO IS THE CHARGEABIL ITY OF INTEREST RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT ON ACCOUNT OF COMPULSORY ACQUISITION OF LAND. THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD IS THAT THE SAID AMOUNT IS CAPITAL RECEIPT AND NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX. HOWEVER, THE HON'BLE SUPREME CO URT IN CIT VS. GHANSHYAM (HUF) (SUPRA) AND IN OTHER CASES HAD HELD THAT INTEREST AWARDED UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT WAS IN THE NATURE OF SOLATIUM AND WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF COMPENSATION. IT WAS FURTHER HELD THAT INTEREST RECEIVED UNDER SECTION 34 OF LAC ACT WAS ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION AND WAS REVENUE RECEIPT. THOUGH THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED UNDE R SECTIONS 28 AND 34 OF LAC ACT ARE TERMED AS INTEREST BUT TWO STANDS AT DIFFERENT PEDESTAL IN SO FAR AS THE INCOME TAX ACT IS CONCERNED. SUCH IS THE PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MADHAV PANDHARINATH KANDE VS. ITO (SUPRA). THE H ONBLE APEX COURT IN CIT VS. CHET RAM (HUF) TALKS OF THE YEAR OF TAXABILITY WHICH IS NOT IN DISPUTE. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE SAME, WE ALLOW THE PLEA OF ITA NO. 2580 /P U N/20 1 6 & ORS SATISH W HONERAO & ORS 5 ASSESSEE THAT INTEREST RECEIVED UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAC ACT IS TO BE TREATED AS PART OF COMPENSATION AND IS NOT TO BE CHARGED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THUS, MODIFIED GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 8. THE FACTS AND ISSUES IN ITA NOS.2581 TO 2583/PUN/2016 ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS AND ISSUES IN ITA NO.2580/PUN/ 2016 AND OUR DECISION IN ITA NO.2580/PUN/2016 SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO ITA NOS.2581 TO 2583/PUN/2016. 9 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 201 9 . SD/ - SD/ - (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 11 TH SEPTEMBER , 201 9 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 2 , AURANGABAD ; 4. THE PR. CIT - 2 , AURANGABAD ; 5. 6. , , / DR B , ITAT, PUNE ; / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE