TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1524
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....705/- received from the Land Acquisition Officer u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on enhanced compensation was taxable in the hands of the assessee. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual deriving interest income from bank. The assessee's land in Village Nangali, Rajapur, situated in the territory of Municipal Corporation of Delhi was acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer, New Delhi vide award dated 19.06.1992 granting compensation @Rs.27,344/- per bigha. On a reference being made by the assessee, the Hon'ble Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi enhanced the compensation vide order dated 1.5.2008. Consequentially, the assessee received enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,26,01,892/-. The asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidual capacity as it accrued to the HUF constituted by Shri Om Pal Singh, the appellant herein, his wife and his four sons viz Shri Than Singh, Shri Diwan Singh, Shri Man Singh and Shri Ram Singh. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal." 3. The Ld. AR submitted that the provisions of Section 56(2)(viii) were introduced by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2010 and that these provisions were inserted only to get over the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Rama Bai V. CIT reported in 181 ITR 400 (SC). The Ld. AR further submitted that a perusal of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Rama Bai V. CIT (supra)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that the Ground of Appeal taken by the assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) was that the ITO has erred in adding an amount of Rs. 64,39,705/- received towards interest on enhanced compensation u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Instead of adjudicating this ground of appeal, the learned CIT (A) held that the land under reference was not agricultural land, and that in view of the fact that the land was not agricultural there was no need to interfere with the order of the ITO. The Ld. AR submitted that the learned CIT (Appeals) had erred in holding that the land under reference was not agricultural in view of copy of representation made by the DDA in the Court of ADJ Delhi wherein in Para 4.3 (PB page 2) DDA had unequivocally represented "that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agricultural land, and therefore, the contention of the Ld. AR that the compensation was exempt was untenable. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material available on record. Although the Ld. AR has argued at length on the merits of the case and the Ld. Sr. DR has also vehemently defended the action of the lower authorities, we find that ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is an altogether new averment and the same was never argued before any of the lower authorities. The taxing Statute requires that not only should correct tax be imposed and collected, but it also requires that the tax should be imposed on the correct person. Vide ground no. 3, as an alternate plea, the assessee has claimed that the compen....