Sh. Jagpal Singh, Ghaziabad V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4988/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2838 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 10-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO.4988/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 JAGPAL SINGH, C/O M/S ASHOK RAJ & ASSOCIATES, 19, NAVYUG MARKET, 2 ND FLOOR, GHAZIABAD. PAN: AAEHJ1098K VS. ITO, WARD 1(3), NEW DELHI. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SOMIL AGARWAL & SHRI LAKSHYA, ADVOCATES DEPTT. BY : SHRI AMIT JAIN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.12.2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 31.08.2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2004-05. ITA NO.4988/DEL/2016 2 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAIN ST THE TAXATION OF RS.27,57,137/- UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS ON A CCOUNT OF RECEIPT OF ENHANCED COMPENSATION ETC. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION RECEIVED ENHANCED COMPENSA TION, ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION, SOLATIUM AND INTEREST THEREON, ALL AM OUNTING TO RS.37,24,171/- IN COMPLIANCE OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, MEERUT. APPLYING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN CIT VS. GHANSHYAM HUF (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC), THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAID AMOUNT AS LIABLE FOR CAPITAL GAINS TAX. T HE ASSESSEE RAISED CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S 54F. THE SAME WAS ALLOWED AND IN COME UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN WAS COMPUTED AT RS.27,57,137/-. THE LD. CIT(A) ECHOED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DESPITE THE ASSESSEES REQUEST FOR GIVING PROPER TREATMENT TO INTEREST, WHICH WAS PART OF COM PENSATION. THIS WAS DONE SO BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE CO PY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, MEERUT, WAS NOT LEGIBLE. THE ASSES SEE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THIS. ITA NO.4988/DEL/2016 3 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELE VANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE HON'BLE SUPREME COU RT IN GHANSHYAM HUF (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT AND SOLATIUM AR E PART OF COMPENSATION ALONG WITH THE INTEREST U/S 28. HO WEVER, INTEREST U/S 34 HAS BEEN TREATED AS DIFFERENT FROM PART OF COMPENSA TION. THE LD. AR HAS NOW PLACED ON RECORD A LEGIBLE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE AND ITS TYPED VERSION AS WELL. SINCE THE NECESSARY MATERIAL IS NOW AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS DEEMED FIT TO SEND THE M ATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE IN CONFORM ITY WITH THE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF GHANSHYAM HUF (SUPRA) . NEEDLESS TO SAY, A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESS EE IN SUCH FRESH PROCEEDINGS. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.12.2017. SD/- [R.S. SYAL] VICE PRESIDENT DATED, 21 ST DECEMBER, 2017. ITA NO.4988/DEL/2016 4 DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.