Satish Kumar v. ITO (2023)104 ITR 694 (Chd)(Trib) Urmila Garg (Smt.) v. ITO (2023)104 ITR 694 (Chd)(Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Capital gains-Compensation for compulsory acquisition of commercial land from National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)-Clarificatory circular was issued by CBDT subsequent to the date of filing return-Eligible to file rectification application, claim of exemption of assessee under RFCTLARR Act was directed to be allowed by the AO. [S. 45, 56(2)(viii),139, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 S.96]

Assessee received compensation for compulsory acquisition of commercial land from National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for compulsory acquisition of land under RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Compensation for both agricultural and non-agricultural land exempt under RFCTLARR Act. However, assessee filed its return of income declaring compensation received taxable as capital gain without taking exemption as per Section 96 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013.  Assessee filed rectification application before AO for rectification of mistake apparent from record after considering the CBDT Circular No. 36 of 2016 dated 25.10.2016  (2016)  388 ITR (St.) 48 and to allow exemption to the assessee in view of CBDT Circular. However, AO rejected the application. On appeal, ITAT held that clarificatory circular was issued by CBDT subsequent to the date of filing return and assessee therefore was eligible to file rectification application, claim of exemption of assessee under RFCTLARR Act was to be allowed by the AO. (AY .2015-16)