CIT, FARIDABAD V. JAI BHAGWAN PALWAL FARIDABAD

ITA/330/2009

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad against Shri Jai Bhagwan concerning the assessment year 2002-03. The core issue revolves around the taxation of capital gains and enhanced compensation received, which was under litigation and had not attained finality. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had previously ruled on these matters, but the Revenue challenged this decision, leading to the current appeal. The High Court referenced a Supreme Court judgment that clarified the taxability of such compensations, leading to the setting aside of the Tribunal's order and remanding the case for further consideration on other unresolved issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 737984 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2010
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Ghanshyam, (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC), Chandi Ram & ors. v. CIT 217 CTR 113
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S K MUKHI
• Assessee Lawyers: URVASHI DHUGGA
• Keywords: Capital Gain; Enhanced compensation; Finality; Interest on enhanced compensation; Taxable
• Section: 45; 155; 260-A

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.330 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.330 of 2009 Date of Decision: March 10, 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad .......Appellant Versus Shri Jai Bhagwan .......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.SK Mukhi, Advocate for the respondent. Notes: 1) To be referred to the reporters or not? 2) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- M. M. KUMAR, J. This is revenue's appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act') challenging order dated 3.10.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi in ITA No.2186/DEL/2008, in respect of assessment year 2002- 03. The appellant-revenue has sought to raise the following substantial questions of law for determination of this Court: I.T.A. No.330 of 2009 2 “1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.ITAT is right in holding that the capital gain cannot be charged on the basis of year of receipt of the enhanced compensation, if the matter is subjudice? 2. Whether in law it is still an open question that the compensation and/or enhanced compensation would be taxable only when it attained finality irrespective of the remedial provisions introduced in the Act from 1.4.2004 by insertion of sub clause (c) of sub section (5) of section 45 read with sub- section (16) of section 155 and there is no more doubt that if the compensation and/or enhanced compensation is subsequently reduced, it would be assessed accordingly under these provisions? 3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.ITAT was right in holding that if the litigation regarding quantum of additional compensation was pending before a Court and had not attained finality, interest on enhanced compensation would not accrue and could be subjected to tax only when the issue of enhanced compensation is finally settled? 4. Whether in law it is an open question that the interest and/or enhanced interest would be taxable only when it attained finality irrespective of the remedial provisions of section 154 and when there is no doubt that if the interest is reduced or increased, it would be rectified accordingly under these provisions.” It has not been disputed before us that the matter is covered by a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case titled as Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Ghanshyam, (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC) against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Accordingly, order passed by the Tribunal based on the judgment of this Court rendered in the case titled as Chandi Ram & ors. v. CIT 217 CTR 113 is hereby set I.T.A. No.330 of 2009 3 aside and the matter is remanded back for decision afresh on the other issue as the Tribunal has not decided those issues on account of the applicability of the judgment of this Court in Chandi Ram's case (supra). Disposed of accordingly. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the CIT (A) on 5.4.2010. ( M. M. KUMAR ) JUDGE ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) March 10, 2010 JUDGE SRM "