आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण,‘ए’न्यायपीठ,चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के , उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 561/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year:2017-18 Devaraya Pillai Subramanian, ITO

58A, Sathyamoorthy Street, vs. Ward – 1(1), Salem – 636 001. Salem.

Tamil Nadu.

[PAN: AIJPS-3267-J]

(अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant by : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCIT सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 10.06.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM :

This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Addl/JCIT(A), Thane (in short Ld.CIT(A)) for the assessment year 2017-18, vide order dated 08.01.2025.

2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as follows:

1) The order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 08.01.2025 vide DIN & Order No.

ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1071978508(1) for the above mentioned Assessment Year is contrary to law, fact and in circumstances of the case.

2) The NFAC, Delhi erred in confirming the addition of Rs.22,46,610/-

being the 50% of the total interest received on enhanced compensation amounting to Rs.44,93,229/- as income of the appellant under the head "Income from Other Sources" in terms of Section 56(2)(viii) r.w.s 145B(i) of the Act in the computation of total tax payable without assigning proper reasons and justification.

3) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the provisions in Section

56(2)(viii) of the Act had no application to the present facts and in circumstances of the case, thereby vitiating the findings in relation thereto.

4) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the pre-requisite conditions required for making an addition in terms of Section 56(2)(viii) of the Act were absent in the present case and in circumstances, thereby negating the findings in relation thereto

5) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the interest component received was inextricably related to the compensation received from Special Tahsildar on account of compulsory Acquisition and ought to have appreciated that the quantification of the said amount being part of the order of the competent authority, there cannot be any scope for bifurcating the total amount as (exempt) compensation and interest income (taxable), thereby vitiating the disputed addition made in its entirety.

6) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that, in any event, having not independently examined the details of nature of the disputed sum received, the consequential addition of the sum as income of the appellant was wrong, erroneous, incorrect, invalid, unjustified and not sustainable both on facts and in law.

7) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the entire computation of taxable total income was wrong, erroneous, incorrect, invalid, unjustified and not sustainable both on facts and in law.

8) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that having not adhered to the prescription of faceless regime, the consequential assessment passed should be reckoned as bad in law.

.

9) The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing of the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles natural justice would be nullity in law.

10) The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, earning income from bus transport service in the name and style of M/s. Arulmurugan Bus Service. The assessee is in receipt of rental income, bank interest during the assessment year under consideration and had filed his return of income on 29.03.2018 in declaring the taxable total income at Rs.4,11,980/-.

4. The return of income filed for the assessment year under consideration was s