IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, PUNE (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM M.A. NO.42/PUN/2020 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.2584/PUN/2016) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 ITO, WARD- 3, LATUR. .. /APPLICANT / V/S. SHRI MADHAV PANDHARINATH KANDE, A/P DHANORA, TAL.- AHMEDPUR, LATUR 413515. PAN: COCPK7746F .. / RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI VITTHAL BHOSALE ASSESSEE BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 20.08.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.08.2021 / ORDER PER S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM: THE REVENUE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS SEEKING RECALL OF AN ORDER DATED 01.07.2019 OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.2584/PUN/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. WHEN THE MATTER HAD COME UP FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE DUE SERVICE OF NOTICE. THEREFORE, WE DISPOSE OF THIS MA AFTER HEARING THE LD. CIT-DR. 3. IT IS AVERRED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT MA RELATES TO THE TAXABILITY OF INTEREST RECEIVED ON COMPENSATION UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT RELYING ON 2 M.A. NO.42/PUN/2020 THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) AS SUBSTITUTED BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2009 W.E.F. 01.04.2010 READ WITH SECTION 56(2)(VIII) OF THE ACT. THIS TRIBUNAL HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF (I) CIT VS. GHANSHYAM (HUF), 315 ITR 1 AND (II) BIKRAM SINGH & ORS. VS. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ORS., 224 ITR 551 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE APPLICABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A R.W.S. 56(2)(VIII) OF THE ACT. 4. WE HEARD THE LD. CIT-DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE MATERIAL ON RECORD CLEARLY REVEALS THAT THE ISSUE IN THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS REGARDING THE TAXABILITY OF THE INTEREST RECEIVED ON COMPENSATION UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER BROUGHT TO TAX THE INTEREST RECEIVED ON COMPENSATION PLACING RELIANCE ON THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A R.W.S. 56(2)(VIII) OF THE ACT WHICH ARE APPLICABLE FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER PLACING RELIANCE ON THE SAID PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, ON MERE READING OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF (I) GHANSHYAM (HUF) (SUPRA) AND (II) BIKRAM SINGH & ORS. (SUPRA) HAD DELETED THE ADDITIONS WITHOUT ADVERTING TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A R.W.S. 56(2)(VIII) OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, NON-CONSIDERATION OF THE PARTICULAR PROVISIONS OF THE ACT ESPECIALLY WHEN THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAD PLACED RELIANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THE ADDITION, IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD WHICH IS CAPABLE OF BEING RECTIFIED U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. THUS, THE APPEAL IS RECALLED FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE OF DECIDING AS TO THE APPLICABILITY OR OTHERWISE OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A R.W.S. 56(2)(VIII) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL IN DUE COURSE OF HEARING. 3 M.A. NO.42/PUN/2020 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 20 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021. SD/- SD/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 20 TH AUGUST, 2021. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)-2, AURANGABAD. 4. THE PR. CIT-2, AURANGABAD. 5 . , , , / DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.