Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE – VIRTUAL COURT
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Kolhapur u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called as ‘the Act’) on 01.07.2019 in relation to the assessment year 2014-15.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who was working in an undertaking of Government of Maharashtra. A return was filed claiming exemption of the gratuity amount of Rs.14,46,037/- and leave encashment of Rs.11,44,375/- u/ss 10(10)(i)&(ii) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Act, which was denied. In the first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee’s claim of allowing exemption in respect of gratuity and Shri Jingonda Apasaheb Patil leave encashment as claimed by the assessee. Thereafter, the ld. CIT(A) realized his mistake and passed the instant order u/s 154 of the Act restricting the claim of exemptions to Rs.10 lakhs and Rs.3 lakhs respectively by noticing certain CBDT Press Release dated 11.06.2010. The assessee is aggrieved by such restriction of exemption by the ld. CIT(A) without giving any opportunity of hearing.
Having heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record, it is observed that the ld. CIT(A) who, originally, accepted the assessee’s claim and allowed the exemption in respect of both the amounts in full, thereafter, came to restrict the claim of exemption by relying on certain CBDT Press Release dated 11.06.2010. It is just elementary to grant an opportunity of hearing to assessee before passing an unfavourable order u/s 154 of the Act. In my considered opinion, the stand of the assessee is correct inasmuch as no adverse order could have been passed by the ld. CIT(A) without affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In the given circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that it would in the interest of justice, if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct him to pass a fresh Shri Jingonda Apasaheb Patil order as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 19th November, 2020. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 19th November, 2020 सुजीत आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / 3. The CIT (Appeals)-2, Kolhapur 4. The Pr.CIT-2, Kolhapur िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
Date 1. Draft dictated on 19-11-2020 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 19-11-2020 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed - JM before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved - JM by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *