The ITO, Ward-3, Navsari V. Shri Ravjibhai Nathubhai Ganvit, Bilimora

ITA 2791/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 279120514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C MATHEWS
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption; Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH AHMADABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2791/AHD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007-08 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, RANGPUJA, SWAPNALOK SOCIETY, NEAR KALIAWADI BRIDGE, JUNATHANA, NAVSARI. V/S . SHRI RAVJIBHAI NATHUBHAI GANVIT 3, NILKANTH RAW HOUSE, COLLEGE ROAD, BILIMORA. PAN NO. A CJPG6668F (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) BY APPELLANT SHRI K. C. MATHEWS, SR. D.R. /BY RESPONDENT SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, A.R. /DATE OF HEARING 05.09.2013 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19.09.2013 O R D E R PER : SHRI T.R.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE REVENUE WHIC H HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A), VALSAD, DATED 16.07.2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08. THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL ARE AS UND ER: [1] ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION O F RS.5,00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM OF EXEMPTI ON U/S. 10(10C) OF THE I T ACT. [2] ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESS EE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10(10C), WHEN THE SCHEME UN DER WHICH THE AMOUNT WAS PAID DOES NOT FULFILL THE CRITERIA PRESC RIBED UNDER RULE 2BA OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES. ITA NO. 2791/AHD/2010 A.Y. 07-08 PAGE 2 [3] ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESS EE IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 10(10C), IN VIEW OF THE BOARDS CIRCU LAR NO.640 DATED 26-11-1992 AND THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURTS JUDG MENT DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. M. CHELLADURAI [2009] 176 TAXMAN 31 (MAD). 2. THE EFFECTIVE GROUND IS ONLY WITH RESPECT OF DED UCTION U/S. 10(10C) OF THE IT ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED EX G RATIA PAYMENT ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT UNDER THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME. HE FURTHE R NOTED THAT IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE EXEM PTION OF EX GRATIA PAYMENT OF RS. 5 LACS U/S. 10(10C) OF THE IT ACT. BUT THE EXIT OPTION SCHEME, THE SCHEME OF BANK OF INDIA, DID NOT FULFILL THE BA SIC CONDITION AS LAID DOWN IN RULE 2BA OF THE IT RULE, 1962. THEREFORE, THE ASSE SSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO EXEMPT U/S. 10(10C), SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION. THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE A.O., THE AS SESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDE RING THE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLD ING THAT THE APPELLANT IS JUSTIFIED IN TERMS OF NATURE OF AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT AND CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF VARIOUS HIGH C OURTS. THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION OF RS. 5 LACS U/S . 10(10C) OF THE ACT EVEN THOUGH THE EARLY EXIST OPTION SCHEME IS NOT IN CONF ORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF RULE2BA OF IT RULE, 1962. ITA NO. 2791/AHD/2010 A.Y. 07-08 PAGE 3 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE SAID ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS BEFORE US. LD. SR. D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ON IDENTICAL FACT S THE AHMADABAD BENCH, IN CASE OF SHRI NARENDRA J. CHOKSHI(SUPRA) & IN CASE O F NAGINBHAI RAVIYABHAI PATEL IN ITA NO. 2785/AHD/2010, SHRI BABUBHAI MANDA BHAI PATEL IN ITA NO. 2786/AHD/2010 & SHRI AMRUTBHAI MAKANBHAI PATEL IN I TA NO. 2787/AHD/2010 FOR A.Y. 07-08, HAS ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF THE AFORESAID DECISION. HE FURT HER SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL WITH ABOVE ASSE SSEES AND THE DECISION IN THESE CASES ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE S CASE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE ALSO BE GRANTED DEDUCTION. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE DISPUTED FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF BANK OF INDIA AND HAD CLAIMED THE EX GR ATIA PAYMENT RECEIVED BY HIM TO BE EXEMPT U/S. 10(10C) OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE WAS BEFORE THE CO-ORDINATE D BENCH DECISION IN CASE O F NAGINBHAI RAVIYABHAI PATEL, SHRI BABUBHAI MANDABHAI PATEL & SHRI AMRUTB HAI MAKANBHAI PATEL (SUPRA), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 17. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSE D THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY AS THE QUANT UM ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER WAS DELETED BY CIT(A). B EFORE US, IN REVENUES APPEAL (ITA NO. 2787/A/2010) HEREINABOVE WE HAVE UPHELD THE ACTION OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE QUANTUM ADDITION. SINCE THE ADDITION ON WHICH THE PENALTY HAS BEEN LEVIED I TSELF IS DELETED, ITA NO. 2791/AHD/2010 A.Y. 07-08 PAGE 4 THERE IS NO QUESTION OF LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1) (C) ON THE SAME. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE ACTION OF CIT(A) IN DELET ING THE PENALTY. THUS THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL IN APPELLANTS CASE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE R EVENUES APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 19.09.2013 SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (T.R. MEENA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA ! ! ! ! '! '! '! '! / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. '(' ) * / CONCERNED CIT 4. *- / CIT (A) 5. !./ ), ) , 12( / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. /45 67 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , 8/ 1 ': ) , 12( ;