TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 514
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....recedent for such assumption were absent in the appellant's case. 4. For that the order passed u/s 263 is without jurisdiction and ab-initio void. 5. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax has failed to appreciate that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue and thus the very invocation of power u/s 263 is wholly illegal and beyond jurisdiction. 6. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in invoking power u/s 263 and passing order holding the order of assessment to be erroneous and prejudicial even without pointing out which of the two phraseology used in the section is applicable to the appellant's case. 7. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax has failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer has passed the order after conducting proper inquiry and investigation and after due application of mind and thus the order passed could not be said to be either erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 8. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax has erred in holding that order u/s 143(3) by the Assessing Officer is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equently initiated the proceeding u/s 263 of the Act by issuing show cause notice dated 31.12.2020 stating the following facts to the assessee: "i. The assessee received total compensation amounting to Rs. 1,62,33,976/- towards acquisition of land under section 3(E) of the National Highway Act, 1956 from the Govt. of India. The assessing officer in his order accepted the claim of non-taxability of compensation relying on the provision of the RFCTLAAR Act read with Circular No. 36/2016 dated 25.10.2016 issued by CBDT. It is noted that assessee received compensation in pursuance of NHAI Gazette notification published on 9th October, 2009 and subsequent notification by Govt. of Bihar in the gazette of India dated 14.01.2013 whereas the RFCTLAAR Act came into farce from 1st January, 2014. Therefore, the exemption from tax liability laid down in the RFCTLAAR Act is not applicable to the assessee's case. In view of the above, it was found that the assessing officer erroneously allowed the exemption from taxability of capital gain arising out of compensation. Accordingly, the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 29.12.2018 was found to be erroneous in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4(2) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act: Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holding has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act." Hence, the benefit under the provisions of the 2013 Act as per the above-stated statutory provision is being given in the cases wherein the award has been made under the provisions of the old Act five years (5) or m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. PCIT did not satisfy with the submission made by the assessee and setting aside the assessment order passed by ld. AO with the direction to him to frame the assessment order de novo by framing fresh enquiries and verification regarding the above issue involved. At the time of hearing the ld. counsel for the assessee contended that assessment proceeding framed by the AO on 29.12.2018 has already examined the issue as alleged by ld. PCIT in his order. In this regard, he invited to our attention to the assessment order framed by the ld. AO where the observation was made at page no. 2 in the following manner: "On perusal of submissions and paper filed by the assessee such as copy of receipts of agriculture land justifying papers, copy of the dreceipt of malguzari tax of agriculture work copy of indemnity bond, copy of receipt of land holder which was obtained from office of the Circle Officer, Patna with respect to the proof of ancestral property and also has produce document evidence such as copy paper cutting of Gazette of India for compulsory acquisition and the said land was shown agricultural land." 7. The ld. AR further stated that when the issue involved had alrea....