ITA No. 47 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 47 of 2007 Date of Decision: 7.12.2010 Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Faridabad ....Appellant. Versus Nathi Singh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Standing Counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 47 and 50 of 2007 as common questions of law are involved therein. 2. ITA No. 47 of 2007 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 7.9.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “D”, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 3945/Del/2001 relating to the assessment year 1998-99. 3. The appeal was admitted for determination of the following substantial questions of law by this Court:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in upholding ITA No. 47 of 2007 -2- the order of the CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer not to treat that percentage of capital gain and interest arising out of payment which is covered by security as income for the year when the law had already been changed by amendment and new section 45(5) was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.1988? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in not adjudicating the issue of deduction u/ss 54B & 54F?” 4. We have heard learned counsel for the revenue. 5. The point that arises in this appeal is whether the amount of enhanced compensation which was released against security and the interest received thereon would be taxable in the year of receipt. 6. The similar issue came up for consideration before this Court in ITA No. 209 of 2004 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Bir Singh (HUF) Ballabgarh) decided on 27.10.2010, wherein it was concluded as under:- “(a) that 'income from Business or profession' and 'income from other sources' are ascertain on the basis of system of accountancy followed by the assessee; (b) where assessee is not maintaining books of accounts by adopting any specific method, it shall be treated to be cash system of accountancy; (c) the interest under Section 34 to be awarded by the Collector partakes the characters of compensation ITA No. 47 of 2007 -3- and is taxable in the year of receipt in view of Section 45(5)(b) of the Act; and (d) under cash system of accountancy, the element of interest awarded by the Court received on enhanced amount of compensation under Section 28 of the 1894 Act falls for taxation under Section 56 as 'income from other sources' in the year of receipt.” 7. Further, the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ghanshyam (HUF), [2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC) had held that the amount of enhanced compensation received by the assessee would be taxable in the year of receipt in view of insertion of Section 45(5)(b) of the Act irrespective of the pendency of any litigation at the behest of the State in any court of law. 8. Accordingly, question No.1 is decided in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The appeal is allowed to that extent. 9. Since the Tribunal has not decided the issue relating to deduction under Sections 54B and 54F of the Act, the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for decision in this regard in accordance with law. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE December 7, 2010 (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) gbs JUDGE ITA No. 47 of 2007 -4- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 50 of 2007 Date of Decision: 7.12.2010 Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Faridabad ....Appellant. Versus Smt. Chhotan ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Standing Counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This appeal is allowed. For reasons, see the order of even date recorded in ITA No. 47 of 2007 (Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Faridabad v. Nathi Singh). (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE December 7, 2010 (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) gbs JUDGE