Sandhya P. Mhaisalkar, Nagpur V. I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Nagpur

ITA 270/NAG/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1540 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PMP
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 270/NAG/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI MUKUL K. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER. (S.M.C.) I.T.A. NO.270/NAG/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09. SANDHYA P. MHAISALKAR, THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, NAGPUR. VS. WARD - 3(2), NAGPUR. PAN ABYPM6208P APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.R. MANE. RESPONDENT BY : NONE. DATE OF HEARING : 14 - 12 - 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 TH DEC., 2015 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISIN G OUT OF THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) - II, NAGPUR DATED 11 - 03 - 2013. THE MAIN GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS IN RESPECT OF CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(10C) OF THE I.T. ACT PERTAINING TO EXIT OPTION SCHEME AT THE TIME OF VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT FROM THE SERVICE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA. 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF THE RESPONDENT - ASSESSEE. I HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED D.R., WHO HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3. THE BRIEF FACTUAL BACKGROUND HAS BEEN MENTIONED BY LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IN PARA 2.1 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER : RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON 30 - 07 - 2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.348450/ - CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 10(10C) OF RS.5,00,000/ - . THE APPELLANT IS AN EX - SBI EMPLOYEE VOLUNTARILY RETIRED 2 ITA NO. 270/NAG/2015 UNDER SBI EXIT OPTION SCHEME. IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER, THE LD. A.O. TOOK A VIEW THAT EXEMPTION U/S 10(10C) UNDER EXIT OPTION SCHEME WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA AS THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA HAD NOT COMPLIED WITH ALL THE SIX CONDITIONS AS LAID DOWN IN RULE 2BA OF I.T. RULES. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) - II, NAGPUR, VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 14.10.2011 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, THE APPELLANT FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE HONOURABLE ITAT, NAGPUR BENCH. VIDE ORDER DATED 12.10. 2012, THE HONOURABLE BENCH SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) - II, NAGPUR. 4. LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE AT LENGTH, HOWEVER, HELD THAT SINCE THE SBI HAS DEDUCTED THE TDS IN RESPECT OF ALL THE PAYMENT MADE AND THE SCHEME WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(10C) THEREFORE, CLAIM OF EXEMPTION WAS REJECTED. 5. IT APPEARS THAT THE APPELLANT WAS NOT CONFIDENT ABOUT THE CORRECT LEGAL POSITION, HENCE BELATEDLY FILED THIS APPEAL. HOWEVER, THE LATEST POSITION IS THAT IN IDENTICAL SITUATION, THE NAGPUR TRIBUNAL NOT ONLY CONDONED THE DELAY IN NUMBER OF CASES BUT ALSO GRANTED RELIEF. HENCE ON THE SAME LINES, THIS APPELLANT SHALL ALSO GET THE BENEFIT OF THE ORDER OF NAGPUR TRIBUNAL. FOR REFERENCE, IN A BUNCH OF CASES (SR. NO.1 ITA N O. 426/NAG/2014 MADHUKAR M. KADU VS. ITO) ORDER DATED 24 TH JUNE, 2015, IT WAS HELD AS UNDER : THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AND THEY EMANATE OUT OF THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IS IN RESPECT OF CLAIM OF EX EMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C). 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS FOLLOWING DELAY IN THESE CASES: S.NO. ITA NO. NAME DELAY IN FILING (DAYS) 1. 426/NAG/2014 MADHUKAR KADU 525 2. 453/NAG/2014 SHANKAR KADU 595 3. 427/NAG/2014 ARUN BABHULKAR 543 3 ITA NO. 270/NAG/2015 4. 452/NAG/2014 VITHALRAO TODSAM. 595 5. 454/NAG/2014 SHEELA DALAL 595 6. 537/NAG/2014 MUKUND PALSAPURE. 658 THE REASON FOR THE DELAY HAS BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE FACT THAT DUE TO HIGH COST OF APPEAL FILING FEE AND RELATED LEGAL FEE, THE ASSESSEES ON LEGAL ADVISE, HAVE BEEN PURSUING ALTERNATIVE REMEDY IN THE FORM OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. THEREAFTER, SUBSEQUENTLY ON FURTHER LEGAL ADVISE, IT WAS DECIDED BY THE ASSESSEES TO WITHDRAW MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND FILE AN AP PEAL. THEREFORE, THE DELAY WAS CAUSED IN THESE CASES. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN SUBMITTED THAT IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN A GROUP OF CASES FOR SIMILAR DELAYS, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS CONDONED THE DELAY VIDE ORDER DATED 09 - 09 - 2014 3. UPON HEARING BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSING THE RECORDS, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND THE SAME IS CONDONED AS SUCH. ACCORDINGLY, WE PROCEED TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES AS UNDER. 4. WE FIND THAT IN IDENTICAL SITUATION THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.20/NAG/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 I N THE CASE OF JANARDHAN M. DHABARDE V/S. ITO VIDE ORDER DATED 8 TH MAY, 2015 HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE AS UNDER : THE UNDISPUTED FACT AS EMERGED FROM THE CORRESPONDING ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) DATED 23 - 12 - 2010 IS THAT THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL, IS AN EX EMPLOYEE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA. VIDE PARA 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OPTED A VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT BY EXIT OPTION SCHEME OF STATE BANK OF INDIA. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED A DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE I.T. ACT OF ` . 5,00,000/ - WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. EVEN THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAD UPHELD THE SAID DISALLOWANCE. HOWEVER, NOW BEFORE US, FEW DECISIONS OF ITAT, NAGPUR HAVE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD WHEREIN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF EXIT OPTION SCHEME OF STATE BANK OF INDIA WAS CONSIDERED AND DEDUCTION WAS ALLOWED. IN A BUNCH OF 10 APPEALS, ITAT, NAGPUR BENCH, ORDER DATED 11 - 092014 (AT SR. NO.1 ITA NO.380/NAG/2014 SHRI MANSUKHLAL CHAGANLAL PARMAR) THIS ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED AND HELD THAT SUCH EMPLOYEES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE I.T. AC T. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH, 4 ITA NO. 270/NAG/2015 WE HEREBY DIRECT TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION AS PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE I.T. ACT. GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS REGARD ARE HEREBY ALLOWED. 5. SINCE THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL A ND THE EMPLOYEES IN THESE CASES ARE ALSO EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA, FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT AS ABOVE, WE ALLOW THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEES SHOULD BE ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION. 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AB OVE DECISION, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/ - (MUKUL K. SHRAWAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 30 TH DEC., 2015. COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. SANDHYA P. MHAISALKAR, LB - 48, LIG, COLONY NO.1, LAXMI NAGAR, NAGPUR. 2. I.T.O., WARD - 3(2), NAGPUR. 3. C.I.T. , NAGPUR. 4. CIT(APPEALS) - II, NAGPUR. 5. D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.