LATE ANIL RANGALE THROUGH LEGAL HEIR ANITA ANIL RANGALE,AURANGABAD vs. ACIT CIRCEL 1, AURNAGABAD, AURANGABAD

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee has been a salaried employee of Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd., Aurangabad Unit. An Early Retirement Scheme (ERS) was formulated by the employer. The assessee was one of the 2 Anita Anil Rangale L/H of Late Anil Rangale employees opting for the ERS. He claimed relief u/s 89 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called „the Act‟) to the extent of Rs.6,06,258/- in the return of income, without claiming exemption u/s 10(10C). The Assessing Officer (AO) held that there was no termination of employment and the amount received by the assessee was compensation which was not a capital receipt. He, therefore, held it to be profits in lieu of salary as per section 17(3) and re-worked the amount of relief u/s 89. No succor was provided by the CIT(A). Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard both the sides and perused the record. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the proceedings before the AO have gone on the premise that the assessee opted for voluntary retirement, which was not thrust upon him. He placed on record a letter dated 06.10.2023 issued by the Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. stating that the assessee and other employees were not entitled for the scheme nor was the company under any obligation under the same to 3 Anita Anil Rangale L/H of Late Anil Rangale the employees. It was submitted that this is an important additional evidence which has bearing on the issue. In view of the fact that an additional evidence has been placed before the Bench, which appears to have significance in deciding the matter, I am of the considered opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the AO with a direction to decide the issue afresh in the hue of the above additional evidence as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to file any further evidence in support of his contention.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10th October, 2023. (R.S.SYAL) उपाध्यक्ष/ VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 10th October, 2023 GCVSR 4 Anita Anil Rangale L/H of Late Anil Rangale