Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagmal Singh And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 2 February, 2016
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
RA-CR No. 46 CII of 2014 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) RA-CR No. 46 CII of 2014 in
CR No. 7740 of 2012
Date of decision: February 2, 2016
Jagmal Singh and another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
(2) RA-CR No. 48 CII of 2014 in
CR No. 7736 of 2012
Satbir Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate,
for the applicant/respondent.
Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate,
for the non-applicants/revision petitioners.
K. KANNAN, J.
1. The applications for review is sought by the Union of India on the plea that the orders passed by this Court in the absence of any representation of Union, failed to take note of an amendment in the Income Tax Act. The said provision made interest component assessed on additional amount on land acquisition awards under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as taxable. The amendment through Section 145-A (b) PREM SINGH 2016.02.03 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RA-CR No. 46 CII of 2014 2 took effect from April 2010. I have relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Versus Ghanshyam (HUF) Civil Appeal No. 4401 of 2009 decided on 16.7.2009 reported in 2009 (9) JT 445 to hold that the interest awarded on enhanced compensation is not taxable. The effect of the judgment has been statutorily abrogated by virtue of the amendment. The award of the Collector itself has been passed subsequent to the amendment on November 10, 2010. A Division Bench of this Court in Hari Kishan Versus Union of India 2014 (2) PLR 662 and another judgment in Attar Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and others, CWP No. 10125 of 2015 dated 3.9.2015 have reiterated the position of taxability on enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act on the basis of the amendment and the fact of inapplicability of Ghanshyam 's case (supra), after the amendment to the statute. The decisions already rendered by the Court were parentally wrong, failing to note of the statutory amendment and its effect on the awards in the two decisions, referred to above.
2. The orders already passed are recalled and the review applications are allowed holding that interest on the additional award is taxable under income tax and liable to be deducted at the time of deposit.
February 2, 2016 (K.KANNAN)
prem JUDGE
PREM SINGH
2016.02.03 10:38
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document