9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO's order to assess the benefit derived from the acquisition of ancestral land in the hands of Satish Kumar (Individual) and not in the hands of Satish Kumar (HUF) separately. 4. That the Learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the claim of HUF, merely on the ground that the Ved Prakash (HUF) in whose name the compensation on account of acquisition of family Agriculture land was released by the State Government has never filed its Income tax Return, ignoring the fact that the Agricultural Income was not liable to tax under section 10(37) of I.T. Act, 1961 and the family had no other income at that time. 5. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the AO's order in not accepting that each and every member born in Joint Hindu Family acquires an interest in HUF - (Sunil Kumar v. Ram Prakash- AIR 1988 SC 576) and Property inherited by Hindu from his father, father's father or father's father's father, is ancestral property- U.R.Virupakshaiah vs Sarvamma & Anr on Civil Appeal N0.7346 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP(c) N0.11785 of 2007) 6. That the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , and where the family has only agriculture income and not liable to tax, no such order can be passed u/s 171 of the Act." 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income on 18.3.2013 declaring total income of Rs. 3,41,320/- showing income under the head 'income from house property'. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 23.9.2013. In response to the same, the AR of the assessee attended the proceedings and filed the replies. AO observed that assessee has declared income from house property only, whereas per 26AS statement the assessee was in receipt of interest amounting to Rs. 48,54,476.79 from Treasury, PNB and Syndicate Bank on which there was TDS of Rs. 4,86,990/-. Neither this income was shown in the return of income, nor claimed credit of TDS. AO issued notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act on 29.12.2014 and 9.1.2015 requiring to furnish details of income from all sources, and details of compensation and interest received thereon during the relevant assessment year and also required to explain why the interest income be not included towards assessee's total income under the head 'income from ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is to be specifically created and only with the creation of corpus an HUF comes into being. He further held that the assessee has not brought no evidence to even suggest that the corpus of the Satish Kumar, HUF was ever created nor any evidence has been brought on record to show that the said Satish Kumar, HUF was in subsistence and had come to acquire the land which was acquired by the State and which has been subjected to tax by the AO in the impugned assessment order and finally held that the claim of the assessee regarding creation of subsistence of the Satish Kumar, HUF, is not maintainable and the same was rejected. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the present appeal is filed by the assessee before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ancestral agricultural land situated at village Bhangel of Noida belonging to Shri Ved Prakash Tyagi & Others (HUF) was acquired by the NOIDA in 1989 and the compensation was awarded which was invested in various assets. In the year 1954 Shri Ved Prakash Tyagi died and Shri Satish Kumar Tyagi became the karta of the HUF namely Shri Satish Kumar Tyagi & others (HUF) having the other co-parceners, nam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income is taxable in the hands of respective HUF only and further confirming that the respective HUFs have already paid the taxes under IDS, since it was not paid earlier. The declaration under IDS has been accepted without dispute. Hence the ITAT deleted the addition in the hands of the individual and upheld the claim of the assessee that income from interest on delayed compensation is taxable only in the hands of respective HUF. Hence, he stated that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the ITAT decision in the case of Shri Ashwani Kumar Tyagi in appeal no.2745/DEL/2017 for AY 2012-13 (Supra) and requested to follow the same and appeal of the assessee may be allowed. 6.1 The assessee filed the Paper Book containing pages 1 to 32 in which he has attached the copy of PAN of Satish Kumar; Form 1 - declaration u/s. 183 in respect of Income declaration Scheme 2016 of Satish Kumar Tyagi HUF alongwith Annexure; Form 2 in respet of income declaration scheme 2016, HUF, Form 4 in respet of income declaration scheme 2016, HUF; copyo f challans for payment of tax under IDS by the HUF for AY 2017-18 for Rs. 3,96,000/- two nos. Rs. 4,00,000/- 1 no. and Rs. 3,92,000/-; ITAT E Bench New ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the Income Tax Act by the HUF was bonafide belief that agricultural income was not liable to tax under the Income Tax Act. What has been ignored/omitted is the fact that interest on enhanced compensation was taxable and the HUF should have filed its return of income for AY 2012-13, showing income from interest on enhanced compensation. The belief is bonafide and cannot in any manner be attributed to any malafide, merely because the individuals having their independent income from self acquired properties or other activities, had not included the income of the HUF in their return of income, which per se is contrary to law. No individual/Karta is authorized to appropriate and show the income of the HUF in his hands, debarring the other coparceners of their right claim to the share of HUF properties/assets/income. 7. This fact is clear from the assessment order of the individual assessee, para-2. The same is discussed by the Id. CIT(A) in the case of Shri Naveen Kumar, brother of the assessee, whose order has been followed in the case of the assessee, vide para-3 at pages 24, para-5 page-25, para-8 page-26 of the paper book and his conclusion in para-9, 10 and 11. The crux of h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
