Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amount described in the land acquisition award as "interest" at 12% per annum was enhanced compensation under the land acquisition law and, if so, whether it was liable for deduction of tax at source under section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The award and the clarification issued by the competent authority showed that the word "interest" had been used inadvertently and that the amount was intended to be additional compensation at 12% per annum under section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Assessing Officer's remand report also accepted this clarification. The payment was not interest for delay in payment within the meaning of section 194A, but part of the compensation mechanism for acquisition of agricultural land. The substance of the transaction, and not the mistaken nomenclature in the award, was decisive.
Conclusion: The amount was enhanced compensation and not interest income liable for deduction of tax at source under section 194A. The Revenue's challenge failed and the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: For tax deduction purposes, the real character of the payment governs, and an amount forming part of enhanced compensation under land acquisition law does not become interest merely because it is mistakenly described as such in the award.