HETAL CHAITANYA JANI (L/H OF LATE CHAITANYA VASUDEV JANI),AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2835/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 October 2026AY 2021-228 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the compensation received by the assessees under the BSNL VRS-2019 is exempt under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The reasoning was based on the fact that identical issues had been considered by the Tribunal in previous cases involving BSNL employees, such as Jayeshkumar Tulsidas Sutaria vs. ITO (ITA Nos. 2387 & 2388/AHD/2025), where the compensation was held to be exempt under Section 10(10B). The Tribunal noted that the revenue had failed to distinguish these decisions on facts or law. The view was further supported by the Supreme Court's judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Ors. vs. Katiji and Ors. regarding condonation of delay and a CBDT circular advising officers not to take advantage of an assessee's ignorance. The Assessing Officer was directed to compute the taxable income accordingly and grant any due refund. The assessees were directed to provide details of the compensation and income computation claiming the exemption. All grounds raised by the assessees were allowed.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by three different assessees (Raysinh Atabhai Vala, Hetal Chaitanya Jani, and Radheshyam Ramashankar Chaubey) against orders of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2020-21 and 2021-22. The assessees had received compensation under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme. In their original income tax returns, they did not claim exemption under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, believing the compensation was taxable. After processing by CPC, Bengaluru, and subsequent rectification orders, the assessees filed appeals before the CIT(A) seeking exemption under Section 10(10B), citing judicial precedents. The CIT(A) dismissed these appeals, holding that voluntary retirement schemes differ from retrenchment and that the relied-upon decisions misinterpreted the statute regarding Section 10(10B) exemption.

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 it allegedly satisfies the conditions prescribed under Rule 2BA. - Assessee's contention: The compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme is fully exempt under Section 10(10B). They relied on judicial precedents, including the ITAT Chandigarh decision in Harish Kumar vs. ITO (ITA No. 42/CHD/2025) and a Telangana High Court order, arguing that the scheme's benefits are eligible for exemption and that their case is factually identical to previous ITAT Ahmedabad Bench orders. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.2831/Ahd/2026
I.T.A. No.2836/Ahd/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIALMEMBER &SHRI GANGADHAR PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ward-7(2)(1), Nr. Khari Canal, Ahmedabad Parshwanath Township, Saijpur, Ahmedabad-382346 [PAN No.AAUPV5905H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. Nos.2834&2835/Ahd/2026 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Hetal Chaitanya Jani (L/H. of Vs. Income Tax Officer, Late Chaitanya VasudevJani), Ward-7(2)(1), 31, Shiv Shakti Society, Nr. Ahmedabad Ghodasar Police Chowki, Ghodasar, Ahmedabad-380050 [PAN No.ABZPJ6846K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Ward-7(2)(1), 3, B Vasudevpark, Inside Ahmedabad Surbhipark, Opp. Karnavati Park, Parshwanath Township, Ahmedabad-382346 [PAN No.AEBPC5414M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Kushboo Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14.10.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.10.2026

ITA Nos. 2831, 2834, 2835 & 2836/Ahd/2026 RaysinhAtabhaiValavs. ITO& others A

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 →