Nafe Singh, Panipat V. ACIT, Panipat

ITA 739/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86818 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 28

Judgement Text

1 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY. T. VARKEY : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 739/DEL/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 NAFE SINGH, VS. ACIT PANIPAT CIRCLE, V&P) SIWAH (PANIPAT). PANIPAT. PAN: BDSPS 1360 R ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PADAM KANUHJHA SR. DR KANUNJHA SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12-02-2015 DATE OF ORDER : 20-02-2015. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:- THIS APPEAL, PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28-01-2011, PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS), KARN AL, RELATING TO A.Y. 2007-08. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 12,98,720/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED ENHANC ED COMPENSATION OF RS. 30,02,143/- AS EXEMPT. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO SHOWN INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 18,80,006/- AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE FILED AND AGAINS T THIS THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF RS. 5,80,006/- ON ACCOUNT OF E XPENSES TO EARN 2 2 COMPENSATION AND INTEREST BUT NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPOR T OF EXPENSES HAD BEEN ATTACHED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE AO REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF EXPENSES WITH EVIDENCE AS TO HOW THE EXPENSES CLAIMED RELATED TO EARNING OF INTEREST INCOME. IN RESPONSE THE ASSE SSEE RELIED O THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GHA NSHYAM (HUF), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IF ENHANCED COMPENSA TION IS RECEIVED U/S 28 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, THEN IF INTEREST IS RECEI VED WITH ENHANCED COMPENSATION, THEN IT IS PART OF ENHANCED COMPENSAT ION. THE AO POINTED OUT THAT HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS NO WHERE HELD TH AT INTEREST EARNED ON ENHANCED COMPENSATION IS EXEMPT U/S 10(37). HE POIN TED OUT THAT INTEREST ALLOWABLE UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT IS PAYABLE IN RESPECT OF ENHANCED COMPENSATION WHICH REMAINED UNPAID TO THE LAND OWNE R. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTSA, THE AO DISALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM AND ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS. 18,80,006/-. 2.1. LD. CIT(A) TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT ASSESS EE HAD RECEIVED ENHANCED COMPENSATION OF RS. 30,02,143/-, WHICH WAS CLAIMED AS EXEMPT U/S 10(37) AND HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION AGAINST THE IN TEREST RECEIVED BY HIM ON ENHANCED COMPENSATION, CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO, INTER ALIA, OBSERVING THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT BRING ON RECORD A NY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM THAT INTEREST WAS RECEIVED U/S 28 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT AND HENCE WAS PART OF THE ENHANCED COMPENSATION. AGGRIE VED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND PERUSED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO SHOW WHETHER TH E INTEREST WAS RECEIVED 3 3 U/S 28 OR SEC. 34 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, BOTH HAVING DIFFERENT IMPORT OF TAXATION. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMIT Y IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), CONFIRMIN G THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE, IS UPHEL D. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20-02-2015. SD/- SD/- (ABY. T. VARKEY ) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 20-02-2015. MP: C OPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR