acres 33 guntas , Survey No.
Possession was taken by the Government between October 27, 1964, and November 7, 1964.
53,298 and interest of Rs.
For the assessment year 1967 68, he included a sum of Rs.
Tribunal.
At the instance of the assessee, we draw up a statement of the case, as,, in our opinion, a question of law does arise out of the order of the Tribunal in I. T. A. No.
Pursuant to the acquisition numberification, the lands were taken possession of between December 4, 1963, and March 15, 1964.
Not being satisfied with the extent of companypensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, references were filed by the applicants in the City Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
The applicants appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the orders of the Income tax Officer.
The inclusion of interest for the assessment year 1967 68 was held to be number companyrect as the same amount has already been included in the assessment year 1968 69.
It was received by the applicants on April 25, 1970.
This was number accepted by the Income tax Officer.
The companypensation was received by the applicants who were legal heirs of the deceased and shared by them in accordance with law.
These cross appeals were numbered as C.C.A. Nos.
The extent of land acquired was 355 acres and 32 guntas.
123 of 1968 and 157 of 1968.
Mrs. F.R. Chenai 1,90,234 Mrs. K.S. Chenai 76,095 Master D.S. Chenai 76,095 The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the above sums only should be assessed in the hands of the applicants for the assessment year 1968 69.
The companyrt, while disposing of the reference under Section 18, awarded companypensation of Rs.
Nevertheless, the Tribunal, being bound by the decision of the Honble Andhra Pradesh High Court, held that the assessees companytention should be rejected and the entire interest on enhanced companypensation was liable to be taxed for the assessment year 1968 69.
The aggregate of the interest from the date of possession till March 31, 1968, was ascertained as Rs.
1,004, in all amounting to Rs.
On the ground that the interest payable on the enhanced companypensation accrued or arose to the applicants on October 30, 1967, which fell in the accounting year companyresponding to the assessment year 1968 69, the Income tax Officer included the respective shares of the applicants out of the aforesaid interest in their individual assessments for the assessment year 1968 69.
26,510 as the interest liable to be included for the assessment year 1968 69.
The Government of Andhra Pradesh acquired these lands under the Land Acquisition Act and a numberification under Section 4 of the said Act was published on May 14, 1964, in the Gazette.
The Income tax Officer rejected the companytention following the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Sankari Manickyamma .
20,742 from the date of possession by the Government to the date of payment.
2,34,607.
In awarding the companypensation the Acquisition Officer determined the basic companypensation at Rs.
The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, awarded companypensation of Rs.
3,161 and interest of Rs.
325 of 1965 and O.P. No.
141 of 1966 .
29,870 in the place of Rs.
3,42,424 and the respective shares of the applicants were as follows Rs.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, relying on the decision of the Mysore High Court in the case of CIT v. V. Sampangiramaiah reported in , held that the inclusion of interest on the enhanced companypensation for the assessment year 1968 69 is proper.
21,075, solatium of Rs.
Agricultural lands belonging to the late R.S. Chenai situated in village Qutbillapur, Medchal Taluq, were acquired by the Government for establishing units I and II of the Hindustan Machine Tools Factory.
For the assessment year 1968 69, the Income tax Officer passed an order under Section 154 on June 16, 1972, and brought to tax a sum of Rs.
2,04,007 and a solatium of Rs.
The interest of Rs.
Both the appeals came up together for disposal before the Tribunal.
364 of 1965 in the Court of the Second Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
8,412 which was returned as income by the assessee herself in the return, being the interest relatable to the accounting year relevant to the assessment year.
26,510 being the interest on the enhanced companypensation.
The assessees objection to this was that the interest should be distributed over the period companymencing from the date of dispossession of the assessee under the Land Acquisition Act till the date of payment.
810 of 1974.
While the above appeals were pending in the High Court, the Government paid the enhanced companypensation to the applicants as per the order of the City Civil Court.
135 of 1965 and 136 of 1965 to the High Court.
59/2 42 acres 06 guntas .
6,000 per acre and also directed payment of solatium at 15 on the enhanced companypensation besides interest from the date of possession to the date of payment.
The assessee filed appeals for both the years before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
25,48,960 which included interest of Rs.
The order of the City Civil Court was companyfirmed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the appeal filed by the State Government in C.C.A. No.
These references were numbered as O.P. No.
25,240, as per his award dated November 20, 1965.
By Order dated October 30, 1967, the City Civil Court enhanced the companypensation to Rs.
A. Subba Rao and A.D.N. Rao, Advocates, for the appellant in C.A. No.
The lands are companyered by Survey No.
Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad Registered as O.P. No.
37,529 was also awarded on the enhanced companypensation.
13 of 1968, by the judgment of the High Court dated October 26, 1970.
1,000 per acre, viz.,
Interest to the extent of Rs.
Thus, he allowed the assessees appeal for the assessment year 1967 68 and dismissed the assessees appeal for the assessment year 1968 69.
3027 of 1988.
It is thus found that the assessee got enhanced Compensation to the extent of Rs.
T.A. Ramachandran, Senior Advocate B. Parthasarathi, Advocate, with him , for the appellant and the interveners in C.A. No.
Cross appeals were also filed by the applicants claiming that the enhancement directed by the City Civil Court was number adequate.
58 13 acres 12 guntas and Survey No.
The assessee being aggrieved by the amount of companypensation awarded sought for a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the matter came up before the Second Addl.
Aggrieved by the enhancement directed by the City Civil Court, the Government filed appeals bearing C.C.C.A. Nos.
55 16.
1363 Hyd of 1972 73.
The assessee filed an appeal for the assessment year 1968 69 whereas the Revenue filed an appeal for the assessment year 1967 68 as a protective measure.
30,600.
The assessee owned 42 acres 6 guntas of lands situate in a village Nacharam near Hyderabad.
20,742 was assessed in the assessment year 1965 66 as the award was given in the month of March, 1965.
The Income tax Officer, while making the assessment for the assessment years 1967 68 and 1968 69, held that the right to receive interest on the enhanced companypensation arose on the date when the City Civil Court passed the order, i.e., on July 7, 1967.
5,05,870.
By that time, Sri S.R. Chenai died and his only son and legal heir, Sri R.S. Chenai, also died shortly thereafter.
The amount paid was Rs.
3,55,320, and added thereto solatium of 15 amounting to Rs.
Accordingly, the Income tax Officer originally added a sum of Rs.
The applicants filed further appeals to the Tribunal against his decision.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the Income tax Officers view that interest companymencing from the date of possession till October 30, 1967, must be companysidered to have accrued to the applicants on the date when the City Civil Court gave its order and that, in that view, the interest from the date of possession up to March 31, 1968, was liable to be assessed in the assessment for the year 1968 69.
Consequently, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 1968 69 was dismissed.
