The said Tribunal by its order dated July 9, 1957, held that the said amount representing the interest was a capital re ceipt and on that finding the said amount was excluded from the total income of the assessee.
2,81,822/ , which included a sum of 48,660/ as interest up to the date of the award.
Hence the present appeal.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated January 31, 1962, of the Punjab High Court in I.T.R. No.
48,660/ , was captital receipt number liable to tax under the Indian Income tax Act?
For the year 1956 57, the Income tax Officer included the said interest in the income of the Hindu undivided family of which the appellant is the manager, and assessed the same to income tax, after overruling the appellants companytention that the said interest was a capital receipt and, therefore, number liable to tax.
N. Kripal and A. N. Kripal, for the appellant.
On September 30, 1955, the Collector of Patiala made an award under the Act ,as a result of which the appellant received on December 1, 1955, a sum of Rs.
The said reference was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court and it held that the said amount was number a capital but a revenue receipt and as such liable to tax under the Indian Income tax Act.
The appellant, Dr. Shamlal Narula, is the Manager of a Hindu undivided family, which owned, inter alia, 40 bighas and 11 biswas of land in the town of Patiala.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
At the instance of the Commissioner of Income tax the said Tribunal referred the following question to the High Court of Punjab under s. 66 1 of the Income tax Act, 1922 Whether on a true interpretation of section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Award given by the Collector of Pepsu on the 30th September, 1955, the sum of Rs.
503 of 1963.
On October 6, 1953, the Act was extended to the Union of Pepsu.
Gopal Singh and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
April 9, 1964.
The State of Patiala first merged into the Union of Pepsu and later the Union of Pepsu merged into the State of Punjab.
The Patiala State Government initiated land acquisition proceedings for acquiring the said land under Regulation then prevailing in the Patiala State.
On June 14, 1957, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner companyfirmed the order of the Income tax Officer.
The relevant facts are number in dispute and they may be briefly stated.
28 of 1960.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Punjab raises the question whether interest paid under s. 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, herein after called the Act, is of the nature of a capital receipt or of a revenue receipt.
The Appellant preferred an appeal to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal.
