Haribhau rajaram Jahagirdar, Solapur V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 41/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 76054 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P L PATHADE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.37/PN/2014 A.Y. 2007-08 BABURAO DAGDU LAMTURE 11-B, NIRMAL NAGAR CO-OP. HSG. SOCIETY, SUNDARAM NAGAR, SOLAPUR 413004 PAN: AAQPL2527B APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(2), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT ITA NO.39/PN/2014 A.Y. 2007-08 CHINCHOLKAR SHIVDAS DATTATRAYA FLAT NO.8, LAXMI APARTMENTS, SOUTH SADAR BAZAR, SOLAPUR 413001 PAN: AATPC1583B APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT ITA NO.41/PN/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 HARIBHAU RAJARAM JAHAGIRDAR PARIMAL, CHINCHOLKAR PLAZA, NEAR RAMLING NAGAR VIJAPUR ROAD, SOLAPUR 413004 PAN: AARPJ1380R APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT 2 ITA NO.43/PN/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 LAXMAN DASHARATH JAGTAP 170, NARSING GIRJI CHAWAL MORARJI PETH SOLAPUR 413001 PAN: AERPJ6484B APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT ITA NO.45/PN/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 PRAKASH FULCHAND BAKALE 162/6, OLD EMPLOYMENT CHOWK, RAILWAY LINES, SOLAPUR 413001 PAN: AAWPB7909F APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT ITA NO.47/PN/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 SHRIPAD YASHWANT GODBOLE 21 SARTHAK VIJAY NAGAR VIJAPUR ROAD, SOLAPUR 413004 PAN: AAWPG8560D APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT 3 ITA NO.49/PN/2014 A.Y. 2007-08 SURENDRANATH R GULGULE 84, SUYOG SOCIETY RAILWAY LINES SOLAPUR 413001 PAN: AAUPG5734D APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 2(1), SOLAPUR RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI PRAMOD S. SHINGTE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.L . PATHADE DATE OF HEARING: 27.01.2014 DATE OF ORDER : 27.01.2014 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE APPEALS PERTAIN TO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ON SI MILAR ISSUES FILED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF CIT(A ), SO THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS C ONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. IN ITA NO.37/PN/2014, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN REOPENING THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WI THOUT RECORDING ANY REASONS TO BELIEVE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN NOT GRANTI NG EXEMPTION U/S 10(10C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE SUM OF RS.5,00,000/- AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN NOT GRANTI NG RELIEF U/S 89(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, OF A SUM OF RS.NIL/- WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON WHATSOEVER. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN NOT GRANTING THE REL IEF U/S 89(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, OF THE ENTIRE AM OUNT WHICH YOUR APPELLANT IS ENTITLED AS PER THE PROVISI ONS OF LAW. YOUR APPELLANT CRAVES FOR TO LEAVE, ADD, ALTER, MOD IFY, DELETE, AND ALTER ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE T IME OF HEARING, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF STATE BANK OF IND IA, RETIRED VOLUNTARILY AS PER EXIT OPTION SCHEME ANNOUNCED BY BANK. IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED EXEMPTIO N U/S. 10(10C) ON EX-GRATIA RECEIVED FROM BANK ON HIS VOLU NTARY RETIREMENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DENIED CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S. 10(10C), WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). AFTER GOING THROUGH THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FI ND THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MUM BAI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NAGESH DEVIDAS KULKARNI VS. CI T (2007) 291 ITR 407 (MUM), WHEREIN, THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT HAS HELD THAT THE EX-GRATIA PAYMENT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT IS A COMPENSATION RECEIVED ON TERMINATIO N OF EMPLOYMENT AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR T HE EXEMPTION U/S.10(10C) AS WELL AS THE RELIEF U/S.89(1) IN RESP ECT THEREOF. THE AMOUNT RECEIVED ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT IS NOTHING BUT PROFIT IN LIEU OF SALARY WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM IN S ECTION 89(1) AND HENCE SUCH AMOUNT IS ALSO QUALIFIED FOR RELIEF U/S.89(1) OF I.T. ACT. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER I S DIRECTED TO GRANT THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN, ITA NOS.39, 41, 43, 45, 47 AND 49/PN/2014, S IMILAR ISSUES AROSE TO THAT OF THE ITA NO.37/PN/2014. FAC TS BEING 5 SIMILAR, SO FOLLOWING THE SAME REASONING, THE ASSES SING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO GRANT THE RELIEF AS DISCUSSED IN PRECED ING PARA. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 27 TH JANUARY, 2014 GCVSR COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE 2) DEPARTMENT 3) THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE 4) THE CIT-III, PUNE 4) THE DR, A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE. 5) GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, I.T.A.T., PUNE