2020 (8) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....parcel of consideration. 1.1) As the prime asset does not fall under the category of capital asset, the Ld. AO (as well as Ld. CIT(A)) ought not to have levied tax on amount received by me u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1984. 2) The Ld AO erred (Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming) in taxing the income which was effectively not received by the me. 3) The assessee craves the liberty to add, alter or amend any of the grounds of appeal or to take any fresh ground of appeal at the time of hearing." The core issue relates to the taxation of the sum of Rs. 3,10,33,961/-. 3. The relevant facts on the issue for adjudication include that the assessee had agricultural land, which was acquired by the Government in the year 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f completeness, the contents of para 10 of the order of the Tribunal (supra) are extracted hereunder :- "10. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) while confirming the order of Assessing Officer has observed that the case of assessee is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bikram Singh & Ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Collector & Ors. (supra) as the said judgment is delivered by Larger Bench and prevails over the decision rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra) which is though subsequent in time but is rendered by Division Bench. We do not concur with the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to make the addition. Undisputedly, while rendering the decision in t....