Pradip Kumar Pal, Burdwan V. ITO, Wd-2(3), Asansol, Asansol

ITA 1472/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9163 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S M TAUHEED
• Assessee Lawyers: U DASGUPTA
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1472/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1472/KOL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011 PRADIP KUMAR PAL,.................................. ..................................APPELLANT NEW ROAD, NEAR CHURCH, KULTI, DIST. BURDWN-713 343 [PAN: AFLPP 8586 N] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ .....................................RESPONDENT WARD-2(3), ASANSOL, PARMAR BUILDING, APCAR GARDEN, P.O. ASANSOL-713 304, BURDWAN APPEARANCES BY: SHRI U. DASGUPTA, ADVOCATE, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI S.M. TAUHEED, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : MARCH 01, 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MARCH 15, 2017 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASANSOL DATED 22.04.2014 AND THE SOLITARY ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE SAME RELATES TO T HE DISALLOWANCE OF ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION OF RS.5,00,000/- UND ER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO WAS WORKING AS DEPUTY MANAGER (FINANCE), ISP, RAMNAGAR COLLIERY . HE WAS RELEASED FROM THE SERVICE OF THE COMPANY WITH EFFECT FROM 28 TH FEBRUARY, 2009 ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, EXEMPTION OF RS.5,00,000/- WAS CLAIM ED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE ACT FOR THE AMOUNT REC EIVED ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT. WHILE PROCESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE, I.T.A. NO. 1472/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011 PAGE 2 OF 3 THE SAID CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISALLOWED. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, MOVED AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 FOR RECTIFIC ATION OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(1). WHILE REJECTING THE SA ID APPLICATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVING REL EASED FROM THE SERVICE ON 28.02.2009 ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT, EXEMPTION UN DER SECTION 10(10C) WAS ALLOWABLE IN A.Y. 2009-10 AND NOT IN A.Y. 2010- 11. HE ALSO NOTED THAT IN FORM NO. 16 ISSUED FOR A.Y. 2010-11, NO EXEMPTIO N UNDER SECTION 10(10C) WAS SHOWN BY THE EMPLOYER. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10 C) BY WAY OF RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 154 WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE AN ORDER DATED 17.06.2011. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 154, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), WHO UPHELD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 154 AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C) WAS MADE BY THE ASS ESSEE WRONGLY FOR A.Y. 2010-11 INSTEAD OF A.Y. 2009-10. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE COPIES OF FORM NO. 16 ISSUED B Y THE EMPLOYER FOR A.YS. 2009-10 AND 2010-11, WHICH CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT WAS NOT ONLY PAID BY THE EMPLO YER TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2010-11, BUT THE SAME WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN HIS TOTAL INCOME AND TAX WAS ALSO DEDUC TED IN A.Y. 2010-11. THE ASSESSEE, IN MY OPINION, THUS WAS ENTITLED TO C LAIM THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C) FOR A.Y. 2010-11 AS CLAIMED A ND NOT IN A.Y. 2009- 10 AS HELD BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. MOREOVER, A ME RE FACT THAT THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C) WAS NOT SHOWN BY TH E EMPLOYER IN FORM NO. 16 ISSUED FOR A.Y. 2010-11, IN MY OPINION, CANN OT BE THE BASIS FOR DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT TOO WHILE PROCESSING HIS I.T.A. NO. 1472/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011 PAGE 3 OF 3 RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 143(1). I, THEREFORE , SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ON THIS ISSU E AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MARCH 15, 201 7. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 15 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017 COPIES TO : (1) SHRI PRADIP KUMAR PAL, NEW ROAD, NEAR CHURCH, KULTI, DIST. BURDWN-713 343 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), ASANSOL, PARMAR BUILDING, APCAR GARDEN, P.O. ASANSOL-713 304, BURDWAN (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), ASANSOL; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.