SAROJ KUMAR HALDAR,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 52(1),, KOLKATA

ITA 2869/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 October 2026AY 2021-202211 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees, respectfully following the judgments of coordinate benches of the ITAT on similar facts. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals, inferring that VRS opted by employees cannot be termed as retrenchment and does not fall under Section 10(10B) because BSNL is not closed. However, the Tribunal found that the assessees' case was similar to those decided by coordinate benches, which had allowed the exemption under Section 10(10B). The Tribunal observed that the Revenue could not provide any material to counter these judgments, nor did it appeal to a higher forum. The Tribunal distinguished the Revenue's reliance on the Delhi Development Authority case, stating it was from a different organization. The Tribunal concluded that the Income Tax Department should not collect tax on exempt income as per Section 10(10B). The Tribunal also referred to the Ahmedabad Bench decision in Jayeshkumr Tulsidas Sutaria, which dealt with similar issues, including condoning delay and accepting the appeal. The Tribunal allowed all four appeals filed by the different assessees.

What were the facts?

The appeals by Saroj Kumar Haldar, Tapan Mandal, and Indrani Chatterjee (and a fourth unnamed assessee) concern assessment years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022. The assessees, employees of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), opted for the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) 2019 and received compensation. This compensation was paid in two phases, with amounts received in FY 2019-20 and FY 2020-21. The assessees received Ex Gratia payments of Rs. 12,52,672/- in AY 2020-21 and Rs. 27,49,475/- in AY 2021-22. The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) processed their returns under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, accepting their declared income. Subsequently, the assessees filed appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) after a significant delay, seeking exemption for the VRS compensation under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed these appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the compensation received by the assessees under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme is eligible for exemption under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as a case of retrenchment or otherwise. Assessee's Contention: The assessees argued that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme should be treated as exempt under Section 10(10B) of the Act, citing various coordinate bench decisions of the ITAT that have allowed similar claims for BSNL employees. They contended that they were unaware of the exemption provision when filing their returns and that the compensation was paid due to mass restructuring. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the assessees failed to provide any explanation or supporting documents before the Assessing Officer or the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) correctly opined that the assessees' case is not covered under Section 10(10B) as BSNL is not closed and VRS cannot be termed as retrenchment. The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities and cited the Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in the case of Delhi Development Authority, emphasizing the principle of parity within the same organization.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(10B),Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 249(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Respondent: Shri Sandip Mandal Jr. Sr. DR
Hearing: 13.10.2026Pronounced: 15.10.2026

PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

All these 04 appeals filed by the different assessees against the separate orders passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter ref

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10(10B)

All 1,316 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(10B) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →