Naurata Ram (Since Deceased) Through Hislegal Representatives v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Ii(4),Ludhiana

Civil Writ Petition No.2513 of 1995 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2513 of 1995 Date of Order: 09.09.2013 Naurata Ram (since deceased) through hislegal representatives. ...Petitioners Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-II(4),Ludhiana. ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON Present: Mr. Aalok Mittal, Advocatefor the petitioner Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate,for the respondent. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. The petitioners pray for issuance of writ of certiorariquashing notices, Annexures P-3 to P-10, issued by the Income TaxOfficer, Ward-II(4), Ludhiana, dated 13.09.1994, 01.11.1994 and14.11.1994, proposing to assess the income for assessment year1983-84, within thirty days from the date of service of the notice etc. Counsel for the petitioners submits, on the basis ofjudgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of IncomeTax, West Bengal-IIv.Hindustan Housing and LandDevelopment Trust Limited, 161 ITR, 524, that as compensation tobe paid to the petitioners for acquisition of their land, has not attainedfinality, the petitioners cannot be assessed to income tax. It is further Civil Writ Petition No.2513 of 1995 submitted that, though, the Tribunal exercising power under the TownImprovement Act, 1953, has pronounced its award but as Civil WritPetition Nos. 5551 of 1989 and 5547 of 1990 are pendingconsideration, the impugned notices may be quashed and orassessment proceedings may be kept in abeyance to await finaladjudication with respect of market value of the acquired land. We have heard counsel for the petitioners and as the writpetitions have been partly allowed by holding that land owners areentitled to a flat rate of Rs.39/- per square yard along with solatium@ 30% and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year from the dateof dispossession and @ 15% per annum thereafter, the presentpetition has been rendered infructuous. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed ofas being infructuous with liberty to the Income Tax Officer to proceedin accordance with law. (RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE September 09, 2013 (DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON)nt JUDGE