Shri Vakhatsingh B.Raj, Bharuch v. The Income tax Officer,Ward-2,, Bharuch

CO 50/AHD/2010 | 1994-1995
Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 5020523 RSA 2010
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number CO 50/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant Shri Vakhatsingh B.Raj, Bharuch
Respondent The Income tax Officer,Ward-2,, Bharuch
Appeal Type Cross Objection
Pronouncement Date 05-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 05-07-2010
Assessment Year 1994-1995
Appeal Filed On 15-02-2010
Judgment Text
C.O. 47/AHD/10 TO 59/AHD/2010 A.Y.91-92 TO 2003-04 1 IN THE INCOME_TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI_D.C. AGRAWAL CROSS OBJECTION NO . I.T. A. NO ASSESSMENT YEAR. 47/AHD/2010 104/AHD/2010 1991-92 48/AHD/2010 105/AHD/2010 1992-93 49/AHD/2010 106/AHD/2010 1993-94 50/AHD/2010 107/AHD/2010 1994-95 51/AHD/2010 108/AHD/2010 1995-96 52/AHD/2010 109/AHD/2010 1996-97 53/AHD/2010 110/AHD/2010 1997-98 54/AHD/2010 111/AHD/2010 1998-99 55/AHD/2010 112/AHD/2010 1999-00 56/AHD/2010 113/AHD/2010 2000-01 57/AHD/2010 114/AHD/2010 2001-02 58/AHD/2010 115/AHD/2010 2002-03 59/AHD/2010 116/AHD/2010 2003-04 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 BHARUCH. VS SMT. JASBHA VAKHATSINGH L/H LATE SHRI VAKHATSINGH B. RAJ AT : VATAMA TAL : VAGRA DIST: BHARUCH. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: BY DEPARTMENT : SHRI. P.R.GHOSH.D.R. BY ASSESSEE : SHRI SUNIL TALATI. ( (( ( )/ )/)/ )/ ORDER PER SHR D.C. AGRAWAL A.M. THESE ARE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST RESPECTIVE I.T.A.NOS.91/AHD/10 TO 103/AHD/10. THE INCOME TAX A PPEALS WERE DISPOSED C.O. 47/AHD/10 TO 59/AHD/2010 A.Y.91-92 TO 2003-04 2 BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 12-2-2010. T HE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT ALL THE CROSS OBJECTIONS WERE FILED ON 15-2-2010 AN D THEREFORE WERE FILED AFTER ORDER IN ITAS WERE DISPOSED OF. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE COS WERE FILED WITHIN TIME PERMISSIBLE UNDER TH E LAW. THEREFORE THEY WERE WITHIN TIME AND VALID. 2. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS ADMIT THE CROS S OBJECTIONS FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSEES RIGHT TO FILE THE CROSS OBJE CTIONS CANNOT BE CURTAILED IF THEY ARE WITHIN TIME. THE TIME LIMIT CANNOT BE THRE ATENED BECAUSE MAIN APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF. IN OTHER WORDS RIGHT TO FILE C.O. IS GENERATED MOMENT APPEAL IS FILED BY ONE PARTY. THE LIMITATION TO FIL E C.O. IS PROVIDED UNDER LAW AND CANNOT BE CURTAILED MERELY BECAUSE INCOME TAX A PPEAI HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF JUST PRIOR TO THE DATE OF FILING OF C.O . IN OUR VIEW THE OBJECTION OF THE LD. D. R IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND HENCE REJECTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED COMMON CROSS OBJECTIONS AS UNDER :- 1. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE LD.C.I.T.(A) PRESENTS THIS CROSS OBJECTION AGAINST THE SAME ON THE FOLLOWING AMONST OTHER GROUNDS. 2. THE LD.C.I.T.(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT INTEREST IN RESPECT OF COMPENSATION UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894 WAS CHARGEABLE TO TAX AS REVENUE INCOME. T HE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 28 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894 IS A PART OF COMPENSATION AND THE LAND BEING AGRICULTURAL LAND THE SAME WAS EXEM PT FROM TAX. IT BE SO HELD NOW IN VIEW OF DECISION OF SUPREME COURT IN CI T VS. GHANSHYAM (HUF) 315 ITR-1 (SC). 4. IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST WH ICH CROSS OBJECTIONS HAS BEEN FILED THE MATTER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) FOR CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS. GHANSHYAM (HUF) 315 ITR-1 (SC) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT INTER EST GRANTED ON ENHANCED COMPENSATION WOULD BE INTEREST GRANTED U/S. 28 UNDE R LAND ACQUISITION ACT AND THEREFORE THE SAME WOULD BE A PART OF THE COMP ENSATION SO PAID WHEREAS INTEREST GRANTED FOR DELAY IN PAYMENT OF COMPENSATI ON WOULD CARRY THE NATURE C.O. 47/AHD/10 TO 59/AHD/2010 A.Y.91-92 TO 2003-04 3 OF INTEREST AND ACCORDINGLY WOULD BE SEPARATELY TAX ABLE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCE. FURTHER ENHANCED COMPENSATION IS GRANTED IN RESPECT OF ACQUISITION OF THE LAND AND THEREFORE INTEREST ON SUCH ENHANCED CO MPENSATION WOULD CARRY THE CHARACTER OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND THEREFORE IS EXEMPT. IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THESE ISSUES THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD. C.I.T.(A) AS UNDER :- 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE I AM OF THE OPINION THAT SO FAR AS THE OBSERVATION OF THE CIT(A) IN THE LATER PART OF PARA GRAPH 4.2.1 WHICH ARE OBJECTED TO BY THE LD. D.R. ARE CONCERNED ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS. SO FAR AS RELIANCE OF THE LD. D.R . ON THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON PAGES 6 AND 7 OF THE AS SESSMENT ORDER ARE CONCERNED THE REVENUE HAVING BEEN NOT RAISED ANY G ROUND WITH REGARD TO THESE ISSUES THE INFERENCE OF THE LD. D. R. IS OF NO USE. 6. COMING TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. A.R. I AFTE R HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE C.I.T.(A) CONSIDER IT JUST IFIED AND IN THE INTEREST OF BOTH THE PARTIES THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO TAXA BILITY OF INTEREST REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE HANDS OF THE CIT(A) ESPECIA LLY IN THE LIGHT OF LATEST DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT (SUPRA ). CONSEQUENTLY THE ISSUE RELATING TO TAXABILITY OF THE INTEREST IN ALL THESE CASES IS RESTORED BACK TO THE CIT (A) WITH THE DIRECTION AS THAT HE SHALL DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT. BOTH THE [PARTIES H OWEVER BE GIVEN A PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. SINCE IN THE CROSS OBJECTION THE SAME ISSUE IS C OVERED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL WE RESTORE T HE CROSS OBJECTIONS ALSO TO THE FILE OF LD. C.I.T.(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE A FRESH. C.O. 47/AHD/10 TO 59/AHD/2010 A.Y.91-92 TO 2003-04 4 6. AS A RESULT ALL THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED BUT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. THE ORDERS ARE PRONOUNCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING . 8. CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 5 / 7 /2010. SD/- (D. C. AGRAWA L) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. AHMEDABAD. DATED: 5/ 07 /2010. S.A.PATKI. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR. ITAT AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGIST RAR ITAT AHMEDABAD.