TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court: Mutual agreement for land acquisition not under sec 194 LA of Income Tax Act.</h1> <h3>Income Tax Officer (TDS), Raipur Versus Naya Raipur Development Authority</h3> Income Tax Officer (TDS), Raipur Versus Naya Raipur Development Authority - TMI Issues Involved:Whether land acquired under the Chhattisgarh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 by the Assessee constitutes compulsory acquisition under section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:1. Background and Facts:The case involves the Naya Raipur Development Authority acquiring land in the AY 2007-2008 without deducting TDS. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notices regarding TDS deduction under section 194 LA of the IT-Act. The AO held the Assessee in default, assessing a tax liability of &8377; 7,71,11,918.2. Appeal Process:The Assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and later to the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, stating no compulsory acquisition occurred, rendering section 194 LA inapplicable. The Income Tax Department appealed under section 260A of the IT-Act.3. Legal Interpretation:The judgment delves into the definition of 'compulsory acquisition,' citing legal precedents. It highlights that in compulsory acquisition, the seller has no option to negotiate the price, which is fixed by statute. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is a key law for compulsory acquisition.4. Comparison with Land Acquisition Act:The judgment contrasts the LA-Act's provisions with the Nivesh-Act under which the land was acquired. It explains the process of acquisition under the Nivesh-Act, emphasizing the role of mutual agreement in determining the price.5. Decision and Conclusions:The court concludes that the land acquisition by the Assessee was not compulsory as the price was not fixed by statute but mutually agreed upon. Therefore, section 194 LA of the IT-Act does not apply. The judgment dismisses the tax case, affirming the Tribunal's decision.This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues, interpretations, and conclusions reached by the Chhattisgarh High Court in this tax case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
