S.Paramasivam Rep by P/H. R.Subramanian, Erode V. ITO, Erode

ITA 1857/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64649 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR SHRI GURU BASH
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 1857/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 S. PARAMASIVAM, REP. BY P/H R.SUBRAMANIAN, 185, SOUTH STATE BANK NAGAR, MOOLAPALAYAM POST, ERODE-2. PAN AEOPP4523P VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-II(4), ERODE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GURU BASHYAM, IRS, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 12 TH DECEMBER, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 TH DECEMBER, 2012 O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-I AT COIMBATORE DATED ITA 1857/12 :- 2 -: 9.7.2012 AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(3), READ WITH SEC. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF SATE BANK OF IND IA. HE OPTED FOR VRS AND CAME OUT OF SERVICE. THE ASSESSE E HAD SOUGHT FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SEC.10(10C) ON THE BENEF ITS RECEIVED BY HIM AT THE TIME OF VRS. THIS CLAIM WAS DENIED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THE SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. EXACTLY IN THE CASE OF A STATE BANK EMPLOYEE, IN COME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD BENCH HAS HELD THAT COMPENSATION RECEIVED ON VRS IS EXEMPTED UNDER SEC.10(10C)(133 TTJ 253)(AHD). 4. ON THE ISSUE OF EXEMPTION UNDER SEC.10(10C), CHE NNAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE ALSO TAKEN A CONSISTEN T VIEW THAT, SUBJECT TO MONETARY LIMIT, THE EMPLOYEES OPTED FOR VRS ARE ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER SEC.10(10C). 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE POSITION, WE FIND THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN DENYING THE EXEMPTION AVA ILABLE UNDER SEC.10(10C). THEREFORE, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES ON THIS ITA 1857/12 :- 3 -: ISSUE ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DI RECTED TO GRANT BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SEC.10(10C). 6. IN RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 12 TH OF DECEMBER, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 12 TH DECEMBER, 2012 MPO* COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR