TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 received by the assessee on account of acquisition of agricultural land by Noida Authorities. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that assessee is a private limited company. The land owned by it was requisitioned by Noida Authority on 15-3-1990. The possession of the land was also taken by them by 31-3-1990. During the period relevant to the assessment year 1990-91, the assessee received a sum of Rs. 30,47,684 as compensation from Noida Authorities. The capital gain was worked out but claimed as exempt as the agricultural land did not constitute capital asset within the meaning of section2(14) of the Act. Vide his order under section 143(3) dated 14-1-1992, the Assessing Officer also accepted the claim of the assessee. As the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer as agricultural land. Thus, the question of taxing the additional compensation received by the assessee did not arise. Ld. Counsel also stated that as mentioned earlier, the Hon ble High Court had passed only an interim order subject to certain conditions. Thus, the amount received by the assessee was a contingent receipt and cannot be brought to tax. While relying on the decision in CIT v. Hindustan Housing Land Development Trust Ltd. [1986] 161 ITR 524 1 (SC), CIT v. Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 90 (Delhi), CIT v. Abdul Mannan Shah Mohammed [2001] 248 ITR 614 (Bom.), CIT v. Laxman Dass [2000] 246 ITR 622 (All.) CWT v. N. Nazeerudeen [2000] 244 ITR 233 (Mad.), CWT v. A.R. Krishnamurthy [2001 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the addition of Rs.2,38,120 on account of cash introduced by the assessee. At the time of assessment, the Assessing Officer examined entries in cash book vis-a-vis the invoices of the cash sales. He noted that the entry in the cash book was made on an earlier date whereas the invoices bore the date of later period. The Assessing Officer observed that a sum of Rs. 2,38,120 was entered in the cash book on 5-5-1996 whereas the cash memo was dated 13-5-1996. The Assessing Officer, therefore, held that the introduction of such cash on 5-5-1996 remained to be unexplained and, therefore, added the same under section 68 of the Act. 8. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition ex parte against which the assessee is in appeal before us. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
