Shubhangi Vijay Lele, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Pune

ITA 1449/PUN/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9840 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1449/PN/2011 (ASST.YEAR 2008-09) SHUBHANGI VIJAY LELE, C-2/28, STATE BANK NAGAR, KARVE NAGAR, PUNE - 411052 PAN NO. ABMPL 9667K .. APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), PUNE. .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SRI SHARAD VAZE DEPARTMENT BY : SRI S.K. SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 12-11-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14-11-2012 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 19-08- 2011 OF THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA WHO FILED RETURN OF INCOME DISCLOSING TOTA L INCOME OF RS.5,49,480/-. THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S.143(3) DISALLOWE D THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 5 LAKHS REC EIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EX-GRATIA PAYMENT ON VRS UNDER THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME FLOATED BY STATE BANK OF INDIA. WHILE DOING SO, THE AO RELIED ON TH E GUIDELINES OF RULE 2BA AND THE CBDT CIRCULAR BEARING NO.200/34/2009-ITA-I DATE D 06-10-2009 ACCORDING TO WHICH BENEFITS RECEIVED UNDER THE EXIT OPTION SCHE ME FLOATED BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ASSOCIATE BANKS UNDER REFERENCE WERE N OT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) 2 3. IN APPEAL THE LEARNED CIT(A) UPHELD THE DISALLOW ANCES MADE BY THE AO. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSE E IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WITH THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AS WEL L AS IN FACT IN NOT ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 R.W.R. 2BA OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 IN RESPECT OF RS. 5,0 0,000/- RECEIVED FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA UNDER ITS EXIT OPTION SCHEME. 2. THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS IN FACT IN NOT ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) BASED ON INSTRUC TION ISSUED BY CBDT DT. 27-10-2009 SINCE THE APPLICABILITY OF SUCH INST RUCTIONS HAVE LEGAL FORCE ONLY IF THEY ARE ISSUED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR AND NOT AT A LATER DATE. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY THE DECISIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DURUKKAR V. VISHVANATH VIDE ITA NO. 1229/PN /2011 ORDER DATED 16-10- 2012 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD AS UNDER : 4. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND ON PERUSAL OF ORDERS OF THE AO AND CIT(A) WE FIND IDENTICAL ISSUE HAD COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF ITO WARD-2, RATNAGIRI VS. DATTATRAYA DHUNDIRA MARATHE VIDE ITA NO.1095/PN /2011 ORDER DATED 05-09-2012. WE FIND THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A) AND THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. ADMITTEDLY THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT CASE IS LE SS THAN RS.3 LAKHS. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE COORDINATE BEN CHES OF THE TRIBUNAL THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND HAS TO BE DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. EVEN OTHERWISE ON MERIT ALSO THE ISSUE STANDS DECIDED AGAINST THE REVENUE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY VARIOUS DE CISIONS OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE FIND IN THE CASE OF IT O VS. GANPATRAO PATIL (WHERE BOTH OF US ARE PARTIES) WE HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEA L FILED BY THE REVENUE BY HOLDING AS UNDER : 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE AS UNDER. THE ASSESSE E WAS EMPLOYEE OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OPTED FOR VOLUNTARY RETIREM ENT AS PER EXIT OPTION SCHEME (EOS) DECLARED BY THE BANK. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y.2007-08. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) OF THE A CT IN RESPECT OF THE EX- GRATIA AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE BANK ON HIS VOLUNTA RY RETIREMENT. THE SAID CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) WAS REJECTED BY THE AO FOLLOWING THE CBDT CIRCULAR F.NO.200/34/2009-ITA.I, DATED 08-10-2009. THE AO DENIED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S.10(10C) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOW ING THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KOODATHIL KALLYATAN AMBUJAKSHAN, 219 CTR 80 (BOM.) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE S CASE IS ALSO SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISIONS OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES OF THE I TAT IN THE FOLLOWING CASES : 1. ITO VS. SHRI JAVERILAL DALICHAND CHHAJED, ITA NO . 326/PN/2010, DATED 08-11- 2011. 3 2. SHRI VENUGOPAL VS. KATTI, ITA NO. 4090/BANGALORE /2011 DATED 15-02-2012. 3. ITO VS. ROHIT KUMAR, ITA NO. 969/AHD/2010, DATED 05-05-2011, ITA A BENCH, AHMEDABAD. WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF TH E CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 3. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 7. SINCE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED HIS DECISI ON IN THE CASE OF VIJAY GANPATRAO PATIL WHICH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY US, THEREF ORE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS UPHELD AND THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. SINCE THE FACTS IN THE INSTANT CASE ARE IDENTICA L TO THE FACTS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL CITED (SUPRA), THEREFORE, WE FIND NO INFIR MITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) OF THE INCOME TA X ACT. ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS UPHELD. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSE D. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIB UNAL CITED ABOVE AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE, WE SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U /S.10(10C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 14 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012 SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED: THE 14 TH NOVEMBER 2012 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT(A)-III, PUNE 4. THE D.R, B PUNE BENCH 5. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE