NDLI: Raj Pal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Income Tax Act 1961 Land Acquisition
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Income Tax Act, 1961 – s. 45 – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 –A land was on lease with a college and the lease was to expire on31.08.1967 – The college moved the State Government forcompulsory acquisition of the subject land – While acting on thisproposition, a notification u/s. 4 of the 1894 Act was issued by theState on 15.05.1968, seeking to acquire the subject land – This wasfollowed by the declaration u/s. 6 of the 1894 Act – After submissionof the claim for compensation, the Land Acquisition Collectorproceeded to make the award on 29.09.1970 – Thereafter, a questionconcerning date of accrual of capital gains arose – Before reachingthe High Court in the reference proceedings, the matter hadundergone two rounds of proceedings up to the stage of appealbefore ITAT – The High Court while answering the reference underthe then existing s. 256 of the 1961 Act disapproved the order dated29.06.1990 passed by the ITAT for the assessment year 1971-1972and held that the capital gains arising out of land acquisitioncompensation were chargeable to income-tax u/s. 45 of the 1961Act for the previous year referable to the date of award ofcompensation i.e. 29.09.1970 and not the date of notification foracquisition i.e. 15.05.1968 – The High Court also concluded thatthe land vested in the Government on the date of making of theaward – The root question is whether the High Court was right intaking the date of award as the date of accrual of capital gains forthe purpose of s. 45 of the 1961 Act – On appeal, held: The decisionscited by the parties are not of direct application to the instant casefor, they essentially relate to the right to receive compensation andnot about the date of vesting of the land, with which the instantmatter is concerned – In the matters of compulsory acquisition,accrual of capital gain depends upon completion of transfer ofproperty from the owner to the Government and not upon accrualof right to receive compensation – Further, the matters relating tocompulsory acquisition of land under the 1894 Act, completion oftransfer with vesting of land in the Government essentially correlateswith taking over of possession of the land under acquisition by theGovernment – However, where possession is taken over beforearriving of the relevant stage for such taking over, capital gainsshall be deemed to have accrued upon arrival of the relevant stageand not before – To be more specific, capital gains shall be deemedto have accrued: a) upon making of the award, in the case ofordinary acquisition referable to s.16; and (b) after expiration offifteen days from the publication of the notice mentioned in s.9(1),in the case of urgency acquisition u/s.17 – In the instant case, theland in question was subjected to acquisition under the 1894 Actby adopting the ordinary process leading to award u/s.11 –Therefore, capital gains would have accrued upon taking over ofpossession after making of the award – Consequently, capital gainsto the assessee-Appellant for the acquisition in question could nothave accrued before the date of award i.e. 29.09.1970 – Theassessment of capital gains as income of the appellant for theprevious year relevant to the assessment year 1971-1972 does notsuffer from any infirmity or error – Thus, in facts and thecircumstances of the present case, transfer of the capital asset (landin question), for the purposes of s.45 of the Act of 1961, wascomplete only on 29.09.1970, the date of award and not on15.05.1968, the date of notification.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 505
Petitioner	Raj Pal Singh
Respondent	Commissioner Of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak
SCR	[2020] 9 S.C.R. 185
Judgement Date	2020-08-25
Case Number	2416

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Raj Pal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Please Log-in to view this content

Commissioner of Income Tax 14 Vs. Jasjit Singh

Bikram Singh and Ors. Vs. The Land Acquisition Collector and Ors.

R. Dalmia Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Mis. Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar, Patna Vs. Amar Singh Gowamal & Sons, Jharia, Dhanbad

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jawahar Lal Rastogi

Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana Etc.

Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs. Acit-cc-46

C.w.s. (india) Limited Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

Raj Pal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Raj Pal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Commissioner of Income Tax 14 Vs. Jasjit Singh

Bikram Singh and Ors. Vs. The Land Acquisition Collector and Ors.

R. Dalmia Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Mis. Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar, Patna Vs. Amar Singh Gowamal & Sons, Jharia, Dhanbad

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jawahar Lal Rastogi

Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana Etc.

Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs. Acit-cc-46

C.w.s. (india) Limited Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

Raj Pal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak