WebMay 19, 2024 · AfterGhanshyam (HUF> [2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC), it was settled thatinterest received on compensation or enhanced compensation under section 28 of Land … WebIn CIT Ghanshyam (HUF) [2009] 8 SCC 412, Interest earned under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,which is on enhanced compensation, ... Following its earlier decision in Ghanshyam (HUF), the Supreme Court held that the interest received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the enhanced income was to be taxed in the year ...
Dnyanoba Shajirao Jadhav,, Latur vs Income-Tax Officer,, on 29 …
WebThe said issue has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam HUF 315 ITR 1 held that the interest paid on the excess amount u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, depends upon a claim by the person whose land is acquired, where as interest u/s 34 of Land Acquisition Act is for delay in making payment. Interest ... WebSep 30, 2024 · It is observed that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Ghanshyam (HUF) 315 ITR 1 has held that interest paid on the excess amount, u/s 28 … rcs taunton
Kamla Devi, Hisar vs Ito,Ward-5, Hisar on 21 September, 2024
WebJul 16, 2009 · Commissioner Of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Ghanshyam (Huf) . S.H Kapadia, J.— Delay condoned. Leave granted. The controversy in the present batch of … WebAug 11, 2015 · [ITO vs. Amarlal (2007) 14 SOT 239 (Del-Trib)] Interest received on delayed payment of compensation is determined and taxable under the head income from other sources on year to year basis. [CIT v Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC)]. WebApr 12, 2024 · The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) 315 ITR 1, … rcs table