https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377819 The Principal Commissioner's revision under section 263 was found unsustainable because the assessment could not be treated as erroneous on the footing that interest received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on enhanced compensation was taxable as income from other sources. The Tribunal noted that the assessee relied on Ghanshyam (HUF) and the later reaffirmation in Hari Singh, which require the Assessing Officer to consider section 28 and determine whether the receipt partakes of compensation. In light of that legal position, the revisional authority's premise did not justify interference, and the assessee succeeded. en-us Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Apr 2019 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377819 The Principal Commissioner's revision under section 263 was found unsustainable because the assessment could not be treated as erroneous on the footing that interest received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on enhanced compensation was taxable as income from other sources. The Tribunal noted that the assessee relied on Ghanshyam (HUF) and the later reaffirmation in Hari Singh, which require the Assessing Officer to consider section 28 and determine whether the receipt partakes of compensation. In light of that legal position, the revisional authority's premise did not justify interference, and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377819