E.Narayana Reddy, V. The Union of India,

WP/5333/2019

AI Insights

The case involves petitioners who retired under the Early Retirement Option Scheme of ICICI Bank in 2003, seeking exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioners approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, following a similar successful petition (W.P.No.4177 of 2019). The Income Tax Department opposed the petition on grounds of limitation, citing the long delay since the exemption was initially denied in 2003. However, the court, referencing a similar case and the principle of parity, decided in favor of the petitioners, allowing the writ petition and directing the refund of the exempted amounts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 687769 (HC-NOT SPECIFIED)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.4177 of 2019, W.P.No.42385 of 2016, W.P.No.16748 of 2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Keywords: Article 226; Income tax exemption; Writ jurisdiction; Early Retirement Option Scheme; Principle of Parity
• Section: 10(10C)

Judgement Text

" THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.5333 of 2019 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Rakesh Kumar) At the very outset, Smt. M.Kiranmayee, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department, intended to file counter affidavit in respect of petitioner No.2. Counter affidavit in respect of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 has already been filed. However, till date, no counter affidavit in respect of petitioner No.5 has been filed. Learned Standing Counsel is permitted to file the same in the Registry. However, she submits that whatever stand has been taken in the counter affidavit in respect of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 is almost similar to the stand which has been taken in respect of petitioner No.2 and she requests for adopting the same ground in respect of petitioner No.5. The petitioners, who took retirement under the Early Retirement Option Scheme of ICICI Bank sometime in the year 2003, have approached this Court invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a similar relief, which has been granted by this Court in W.P.No.4177 of 2019, which was disposed of on 17.09.2019. At the very outset, it was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that within short span of time, after filing of W.P.No.4177 of 2019, the present writ petition was filed. However, W.P.No.4177 of 2019 was earlier taken up and decided in favour of the petitioners mainly on the ground of issuance of circular by 2 respondent No.1 vide Notification No.200/3/2016-ITA.1 dated 13.04.2016. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since identical claim had travelled upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court and it was set at rest by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, respondent No.1 was constrained to issue circular dated 13.04.2016 for granting benefit of exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the employees, who were forced to retire under the Scheme i.e., Early Retirement Option Scheme, 2003. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4177 of 2019 and requests for passing the same order. Learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department by way of referring to fact disclosed in the counter affidavit filed in respect of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 submits that the claim of the petitioners are barred on the principle of limitation, since the exemption was denied to the petitioners long back in the year 2003 and primarily on this very ground she has opposed the writ petition. However, she has not disputed that recently in an identical situation in W.P.No.4177 of 2019, which was filed almost simultaneously of the present writ petition, a co-ordinate bench of this Court by order dated 17.09.2019 has passed the following order: “A petitioner, who was similarly placed as that of the present petitioners, approached the Madras High Court in the year 2016 by filing W.P.No.42385 of 2016 as his revised return was rejected and exemption was denied. He was granted relief by the High Court of Judicature of Madras. The Madras High Court by an order, dated 11.07.2018, that was passed recently, granted 3 relief to the petitioner in W.P.No.16748 of 2018. Hence, in our considered view, this is not a case to deny the relief on the ground of delay and that, on the other hand, this is a fit case to grant the relief on the principle of parity. In view of the above obtaining legal position coupled with the contents of the circular referred to supra and as reliefs are granted by Law Courts to all the retirees who approached the Courts with similar requests under similar circumstances and as this Court while exercising equity jurisdiction has got the discretionary power and as adequate grounds exist for judicious exercise of the discretion in favour of the petitioners and, further as the petitioners on the principle of parity are entitled to the reliefs, we find that the writ petition deserves to be allowed. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed holding that the petitioners shall be entitled to exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act and that as a result, they will also be entitled to refund of the appropriate amounts. Accordingly, the respondents 1 to 4 are directed to refund the appropriate amounts to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” In normal course, after such a long time, there was no reason to entertain the writ petition, but, since recently in an identical situation, the case of other bank employees was allowed by this Court and there is no reason to pass a different order. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 17.09.2019 passed in W.P.No.4177 of 2019. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 10.03.2020 ivd "