<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (7) TMI 1002 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249966</link>
    <description>Enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition is taxable under section 45(5) of the Income-tax Act in the year of receipt, because the provision deems the enhanced component to be capital gains when compensation is increased by a court, tribunal or authority. The provision also covers solatium, the 12 per cent additional amount, and interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as part of enhanced compensation. After insertion of section 45(5), the earlier rule in Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. no longer governs post-amendment taxation of disputed enhancement; the later Supreme Court interpretation in Ghanshyam (HUF) controls the tax treatment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:22:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=360808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 1002 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249966</link>
      <description>Enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition is taxable under section 45(5) of the Income-tax Act in the year of receipt, because the provision deems the enhanced component to be capital gains when compensation is increased by a court, tribunal or authority. The provision also covers solatium, the 12 per cent additional amount, and interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as part of enhanced compensation. After insertion of section 45(5), the earlier rule in Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. no longer governs post-amendment taxation of disputed enhancement; the later Supreme Court interpretation in Ghanshyam (HUF) controls the tax treatment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>