High Court Of Punjab & Haryana
CIT vs. Charanjit Jawa
Section 260A
Asst. Year 1997-98
N.K. Sud & Hemant Gupta, JJ.
IT Appeal No. 144 of 2003
23rd February, 2004
Counsel Appeared :
Dr. N.L. Sharda, for the Appellant
JUDGMENT
N.K. SUD, J. :
The Revenue has filed this appeal under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), against the order of the ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (in short “the Tribunal”), dt. 28th Nov., 2002.
The assessee is a judicial officer. His claim that he had not been allowed pay scale at the appropriate time to which he was entitled was accepted by the High Court and it was ordered that his pay scale be appropriately fixed and that the consequential arrears be paid to him. The High Court also directed that interest at the rate of 12 per cent on the arrears from the date of accrual till the date of payment be also allowed. In pursuance thereof, the assessee received arrears of salary along with interest of Rs. 3,41,148. The said amount was treated as income by the AO for the asst. yr. 1997-98 and added to the taxable income of the assessee. The assessee claimed that the interest allowed by the High Court in its discretion on the arrears of salary did not constitute income and was not liable to tax. This claim has been accepted by the Tribunal by placing reliance on its earlier order in the case of another judicial officer, Sh. B. Rai, whereby relief had been allowed under identical circumstances. The said order of the Tribunal in B. Rai’s case has already been upheld by this Court CIT vs. B. Rai (2004) 186 CTR (P&H) 244 : (2003) 264 ITR 617 (P&H).
Since the order of the Tribunal is in conformity with the law laid down by this Court in B. Rai’s case (supra), we are of the view that no substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal for consideration by this Court. There is a delay in filing as well as in refiling the present appeal. Separate applications for condonation of delay have been filed. However, since we are of the view that there is no case on the merits, we are not inclined to issue notice to the assessee merely for considering the case for condonation of delay.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine.
[Citation : 270 ITR 173]
