Meenal Dattatray Kulkarni, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Pune

ITA 1417/PUN/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9837 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINITA MENON
• Assessee Lawyers: P S KULKARNI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1417/PN/2011 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2 008-09) MEENAL DATTATRAY KULKARNI, APPELLANT FLAT NO. 9, RADHAPRIYA COOP HSG SOCIETY, S.NO. 37/1/3 KARVENAGAR, PUNE 411052 PAN ABTPK9168K V. INCOME TAX OFFICER RESPONDENT WARD 6 (4),PUNE APPELLANT BY : SHRI. P.S. KULKARNI RESPONDENT BY : SMT. VI NITA MENON DATE OF HEARING : 09/11/1 2 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 -11-12 O R D E R PER R.S. PADVEKAR, JM IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE I MPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) III, PUNE FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 DA TED 23 RD AUGUST 2011. THE SOLE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IS THE DENIAL OF THE EX EMPTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S. 10(10C) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF EX-G RATIA AMOUNT RECEIVED BY HER FROM HER EMPLOYER I.E. STATE BANK OF INDIA, UNDER THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME. THE ASSESSEE WAS EMPLOYEE OF THE STATE B ANK OF INDIA. THE ASSESSEE OPTED FOR THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME OF THE ST ATE BANK OF INDIA AND TOOK THE VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT FROM THE SERVICE. BEF ORE THE A.O, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT U/S. 10(10C) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED FOR BASIC EXEMPTION OF RS. 5,00,000/- IN RESPECT OF THE VRS COMPENSATION WHICH WAS GIVEN TO HER BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA O N HER VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT AS PER THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME. THE A.O. REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE M ATTER BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT THE IDE NTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ITAT A BENCH OF PUNE IN TH E CASE OF ITO VS. SMT. JAYSHREE ARUN WALWADKAR, ITA NO. 1047/PN/2011, ORDE R DATED 29 TH AUGUST 2012. 2 ITA NO. 1417/PN/2011 MEENAL DATTATRAY KULKARNI A.Y.2008-09 THE SAID DECISION HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN ANOTHER CAS E I.E. DY CIT, RATNAGIRI CIRCLE VS. SHRI RAJENDRA SAHADEV DHURAT, ITA NO. 1357/PN/2011, ORDER DATED 15 TH OCTOBER 2012. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KOODATHIL KALLYATAN AMBUJAKSHAN, 21 9 CTR 80 (BOM). IT IS TO BE NOTED HERE THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE J URISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KOODATHIL KALLYATAN AMBUJAKSHAN (SUPRA) HAS BEEN AC CEPTED BY THE CBDT AND NO FURTHER APPEAL IS FILED, AND TO THA T EFFECT, BOARD HAS ISSUED THE CIRCULAR. AFTER GIVING OUR ANXIOUS CONS IDERATION TO THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A), WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE EXERCISE DONE FOR REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS IN TOTAL DISREGARD TO THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS. WE, ACCORDINGLY, ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21ST NOVEMBER 2012. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (R.S.PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED THE 21ST NOVEMBER, 2012 US COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-III, PUNE 4. THE CIT(A)-, III, PUNE 5. THE D.R. B BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE /- TRUE COPY-/ BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE