Conversion for Reservation Benefits Is a Fraud on the Constitution: Supreme Court Rejects SC Certificate for Reconverted Christian Patent Office Guidelines Must Be Followed for Consistency in Decisions: Madras High Court Limitation Cannot Obstruct Justice When Parties Consent to Extensions: Madhya Pradesh High Court Additional Fees Are Incentives, Not Penalties: Orissa High Court Upholds Central Motor Vehicles Rules Amendment Interpretation of Tender Eligibility Criteria Lies with Tendering Authority: Gujrat High Court Upholds Discharge of Tender Complaints Were Contradictory and Did Not Establish Prima Facie Case for SC/ST Act Charges: J&K HC Insurance Cover Notes Hold Policy Validity Unless Proven Otherwise: Kerala High Court Upholds Compensation in Fatal Accident Case Article 21 Of Constitution Applies Irrespective Of Nature Of Crime. Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Amounts To Punishment Without Adjudication: Calcutta HC Concept Of 'Liberal Approach' Cannot Be Used To Jettison The Substantive Law Of Limitation: Delhi High Court Limitation is Not Always a Mixed Question of Fact and Law: Bombay High Court Dismisses 31-Year-Old Specific Performance Suit as Time-Barred Intent Coupled with Trespass Constitutes Full Offence: Supreme Court Mere Possession of Bribe Money Insufficient Without Proof of Demand and Acceptance: Supreme Court Right to Promotion is Not a Fundamental Right; Retrospective Benefits Without Service Cannot Be Granted: Supreme Court of India Oral Gift Validity in Mohammedan Law: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Constructive Possession and Injunction Unauthorized Construction on Government Irrigation Land Must Be Demolished: Calcutta High Court Directs Sub-Divisional Officer High Court Upholds Dismissal of Petition Over Road Obstruction Due to Non-Prosecution Victim of Rape Has Right to Bodily Integrity and Reproductive Choice: Gujarat High Court Permits Termination of 24-Week Pregnancy Contradictions In Eyewitness Accounts And Suppression Of Crucial Evidence Weaken The Prosecution's Case: Telangana High Court High Court of Sikkim Sets Aside Trial Court’s Decision on Maintainability of Suit: Preliminary Issues Must Be Purely of Law Courts Must Focus on Substance Over Procedure, Says High Court Writ Petitions Against Civil Court Orders Must Be Under Article 227: Patna High Court Reiterates Jurisdictional Boundaries Kerala High Court Upholds Eviction, Rejects Sub-Tenant's Kudikidappu Claim Contractual Employment Does Not Confer Right to Regularization: Jharkhand High Court Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act for Past Domestic Violence: Bombay High Court Tenants Cannot Prescribe How Landlords Utilize Their Property: Delhi High Court Validates Eviction Labour Commissioner to Decide Petitioner’s Date of Birth Claim within Three Months, Ensuring Proper Verification and Consideration of Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Concealment of Health Condition and False Allegations Amount to Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Possession Implies Constructive Notice: Duty to Inquire Rests on Subsequent Purchasers: Supreme Court Clarifies Bona Fide Purchase Standards

Interest on Compensation Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is Taxable as Income from Other Sources Post 2010 Amendment: Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has clarified the taxability of interest on compensation or enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, bringing it under the ambit of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ruling pronounced by the bench comprising Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav on April 8, 2024, overturned the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s (ITAT) earlier decision.

The issue centered on the appeal by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax against the respondent Inderjit Singh Sodhi (HUF). The primary legal query involved determining if the interest received under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, following the amendments to the Income Tax Act in 2010, was taxable.

The respondent had claimed an exemption on interest received (Rs.8,02,13,161/-) as part of the compensation for land acquisition. The Assessing Officer (AO), applying Section 56(2)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, treated this interest as taxable, allowing a 50% statutory deduction. The ITAT had earlier deleted this addition, relying on pre-2010 judgments, which was contested by the Revenue.

Taxability of Interest: The High Court observed, “interest, whether on compensation or on enhanced compensation, shall be considered as income from other sources and shall be exigible to income tax” (Para 29). The Court noted the legislative amendment in 2010 significantly changed the taxability context.

Relevance of Supreme Court Decisions: The High Court found ITAT’s reliance on pre-2010 Supreme Court decisions, particularly Ghanshyam (HUF), to be incorrect. These judgments were rendered obsolete post the 2010 amendment.

Legislative Amendment Impact: Highlighting the insertion of Section 56(2)(viii) in 2010, the Court underlined that it brought the income via interest on compensation within the scope of ‘income from other sources’ (Paras 22, 29).

Examination of Section 28 and 34 of Land Acquisition Act: The Court elaborated on these sections, noting their purpose and interplay with the Income Tax Act post-amendment.

Decision: Reversing the ITAT’s decision, the Delhi High Court held that interest on compensation post-land acquisition is taxable under the Income Tax Act, post the 2010 amendment. The concurrent findings of the AO and CIT(A) were affirmed, thereby allowing the appeal of the Revenue.

Date of Decision: April 08, 2024.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 10 v. Inderjit Singh Sodhi (HUF)

 

Similar News