Commissioner Of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Shree Lajja Ram, Vpo Sukhrali, Gurgaon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ITA No.726 of 2008Date of decision: 8.2.2011-----Appellant Vs. Shree Lajja Ram, VPO Sukhrali, Gurgaon ----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:-Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr.Standing Counsel for the revenue.Ms. Jyoti, Advocate for the respondent. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. This order will dispose of ITA Nos.726 and 877 of 2008 asboth the appeals involve common questions. ITA No.726 of 2008 has been preferred by the revenue undersection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short, ‘the Act’) against theorder dated 31.1.2008 passed by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, DelhiBench ‘F’ New Delhi in ITA No.604/DEL/2004 for the assessment year1997-98 claiming following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theHon’ble ITAT was right in law in setting aside the quantumorder with a direction to the Assessing Officer for decidingafresh the correct status of the assessee as to whether HUF orindividual, even when the land revenue records i.e.Jamabandi clearly indicate that agricultural land in questionwas owned by the assessee in his individual capacity and notowned by Sh.Lajja Ram (HUF) and where there is death offather intestate, property which devolves on legal heirsmentioned in Class I, devolves on them in their individualcapacity and it will not be HUF property in their hands? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theHon’ble ITAT was right in law in holding that interest onenhanced compensation can be brought to tax only on accrualbasis and the entire interest cannot be taxed in the year ofreceipt till the dispute reaches the finality? 3. Whether in law it is an open question that the interestand/or enhanced interest would be taxable only when itattained finality irrespective of the remedial provisions ofsection 154 and when there is no doubt that if the interest isreduced or increased, it would be rectified accordingly underthese provisions?” Learned counsel for the assessee points out that in pursuance oforder of remand passed by the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer has decidedthe issue against the assessee against which appeal is pending before theCIT(A). In view of above, these appeals are dismissed as infructuouswith liberty to the revenue to contest the matter before the CIT(A) inaccordance with law. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge February 8, 2011‘gs’ (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Judge