TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... before this court, whereby the compensation was enhanced, granting inter-est at the rates stipulated under the amended Land Acquisition Act. The said proceedings became final as per the judgment delivered by this court on August 28, 1987, in the concerned land acquisition appeal. The total amount awarded by this court towards interest on the enhanced compen-sation for the period from May 1, 1973, to August 28, 1987, was Rs.96,56,593, out of which the deceased Lucy Kochuvareed obtained a two-thirds share, i.e., Rs. 64,37,728 ; which was disbursed to her in three instalments during the year ended on March 31, 1988, March 31, 1989 and March 31, 1990 respectively. 3. On March 30, 1989, the assessee (Lucy Kochuvareed) remitted a sum of Rs. 26,58,000 as borne by exhibit P1 challan receipt, wherein the assessment year was mentioned as "1989-90". Subsequently on October 7, 1989, the assessee wrote a letter to the concerned Income-tax Officer stating that the assessment year shown as "1989-90" was only a mistake, instead of remit-ting the amounts by separate challans for 11 years and requested the Department to give credit to the 11 years commencing from the assessment years 1979....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he High Court were got finalized. Accordingly, time was sought for to file the returns on different occasions (according to the petitioner she was granted time till October 24, 1989, as stated in paragraph 5 of the writ petition). It was after finalisation of the proceedings before this court in the land acqui-sition appeal, that she chose to file the returns on October 11, 1989 for the 11 assessment years 1979-80 to 1989-90, though the returns in respect of the assessment years 1979-80 to 1984-85 were belated. 6. The assessing authority who did not accept the returns in respect of the assessment years 1979-80 to 1984-85 being time barred, issued fresh notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act on January 18, 1990. Instead of filing fresh returns, the deceased assessee, as per exhibit P4 series letters dated February 20, 1990, requested the assessing authority to treat the returns already filed by her on October 11, 1989 as valid returns in response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. Finally, the first respondent passed the final orders under section 143(3) on December 31, 1990, for the assessment years 1979-80 to 1984- 85 as borne by exhib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 148 and other relevant provisions of law were admittedly issued on July 4, 1980 and July 15, 1983, no return was filed but for sending a reply dated July 28, 1983, stating that the matter could not be finalized because of the proceedings pending before the High Court of Kerala and thus seeking for further time as conceded in paragraph 7 of the writ petition. It is also conceded in the very same paragraph that in response to the subsequent notice dated January 18, 1990, issued by the Department under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, the assessee, vide exhibit P4 series letters dated February 20, 1990, had requested the Income-tax Officer to treat the returns already filed on October 11, 1989 as the valid returns in response to the notice. The contention of the petitioner that the remittance made on March 30, 1989 vide exhibit P1 challan was only in respect of the year 1989-90 that too by mistake, has been sought to be rebutted by producing exhibit R1(a) letter dated October 7, 1989, written by the assessee seeking to have the amount credited towards the tax liability for 11 years commencing from 1979-80 to 1989-90 as stated therein. The petitioner has reiterated the contention....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the said contention, pointing out that the exhibit P6 appellate order was passed only on November 21, 2005. 11. It is conceded by both the sides that interest payable on the compen-sation pursuant to the land acquisition proceedings taken by the Govern-ment of Kerala was got quantified and became final only on passing the judgment by this court in the concerned land acquisition appeal in the year 1987 and the said amounts were disbursed to the assessee in three instal-ments, during the year ending on March 31, 1988, March 31, 1989 and March 31, 1990. It is beyond doubt that the said amounts, though dis-bursed in a particular year/years is liable to be distributed for the different years concerned, in view of the declaration of law in this regard by a Full Bench of this court in Peter John v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 711 and by the apex court in Sankari Manickyamma v. CIT [1990] 181 ITR 400. The case of the petitioner is that the assessee, despite the receipt of the section 148 notice dated July 4, 1980 and the section 142(1) notice dated July 15, 1983, could not file any return, as the main source of the income was from the interest to be obtained on enhancement of the compe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hare of the deceased assessee, was disbursed to her by way of three instalments in the years ended on March 31, 1988, March 31, 1989 and March 31, 1990. It was only on finali-zation of the quantum as above, that the deceased assessee volunteered to pay the sum of Rs. 26,58,000 towards the tax liability on March 30, 1989, as borne by exhibit P1. Though the assessment year was shown in exhibit P1 challan as "1989-90", it was subsequently sought to be corrected vide exhi-bit R1(A) dated October 7, 1989, to have it apportioned in respect of the 11 different assessment years from 1979-80 ; followed by the returns filed on October 11, 1989. It was without mentioning anything about exhibit R1(A) letter written by the deceased assessee, that the petitioner chose to mould the writ petition, wrongly stating that exhibit P1 payment was only in respect of the assessment year 1989-90. The course and conduct pursued by the petitioner in filing the writ petition, without disclosing the entire facts cannot but be deprecated. 14. Incidentally, it is to be noted that the appellant/petitioner in Writ Appeal No. 1668 of 2002 (referred to by the petitioner and relied on by the appel-late auth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on finalization of the said proceedings (on the basis of the exact income obtained by way of interest), followed by filing of the necessary returns and also after requesting the Department vide exhibit P4 series letters dated February 20, 1990 to treat the returns already filed on October 11, 1989 as valid returns in response to the notice dated January 18, 1990, issued by the Department under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, the petitioner is estopped from contending that the payment effected by the assessee was not voluntary and that no amount could have been appropriated by the Department in respect of the tax admitted and shown as due for the different assessment years as requested by the assessee herself in exhibit R1(A) letter dated October 7, 1989 and as shown in the returns filed on October 11, 1989. The petitioner cannot be permitted to blow hot and cold simultaneously and the conten-tion raised to the contrary does not appear to be palatable to this court. 16. Somewhat a similar situation as to the sustainability of the course pursued by the Department arose for consideration of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Iqbal Singh Atwal v. CIT [1984] 1....