KISHORKUMAR MAGANLAL SHIRODARIA,RAJKOT vs. ITO WD 2(2)(3) RAJKOT, RAJKOT

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट । In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 958 & 959/RJT/2026 [ िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 ] Kishorkumar Maganlal Shirodaria, ITO Wd 2(2)(3), Pearl Avenue, Flat No. B – 402, Vs. Income Tax Office, New Opp. Crystal Mall, R. K. Park Main Aayakar Bhavan, Vatika, Road, Nana Mava Rajkot Gujrat Race Course Ring Road, 360005 Rajkot Gujrat 360001 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AGBPS8835J (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Kumar Pandya, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No. 1190 & 1197/RJT/2026 [ िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 ] Visheswar Shivdayal Yadav, ITO WD 4, JND Veraval, Bharat Sanchar Nigam, Vs. Yogeshwar Bhavan, Varshingpur Road Una Veraval, Gujrat 362265 Veraval, Gujarat 362560 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAUPY0930D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent)

Appellant by : Ms. Khushboo Shah, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05/10/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/10/2026 :: आदेश/ORDER :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM : Captioned four appeals filed by the different assessees, pertaining to Assessment Years 2020-21 and 2021-22, are directed against the separate orders passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which in turn arise out of separate orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(1) of the Income- tax Act. 2. Since, the issues involved in all these appeals of different assessees are common and identical, therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. The facts narrated in ITA No.1190/Rjt/2026, in the case of Visheswar Shivdayal Yadav have been considered for deciding these appeals en masse. 3. The facts of the case as per lead case in ITA No.1191/Rjt/2026, have been considered, which are as follows: The appeal has been instituted against the intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.11.2020. The appellant is an individual and had filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year u/s 139(1) of the Act declaring total income of Rs. 6,17,510/-. The return was processed by CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act, wherein the income returned by the appellant was accepted and tax liability was computed accordingly. The intimation determined total income at Rs. 6,17,510/- and computed tax and interest thereon as per the provisions of the Act. During the relevant previous year, the appellant had received, inter alia, salary income and an amount described as ex-gratia compensation pursuant to a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) floated by his employer, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL). The said ex-gratia amounting to Rs. 1,48,821/- was included by the appellant in the total income offered to tax in the return of income filed for the year under consideration.

Subsequently, the appellant contended that the ex-gratia amount received under the BSNL VRS Scheme, 2019 partakes the character of retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption u/s 10(10B) of the Act. It has been submitted that the exemption u/s 10(10B) was not claimed in the original return of income and the amount was offered to tax at the time of filing the return. The core issue arising in the present appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to claim exemption u/s 10(10B) of the Act in respect of the ex-gratia amount of Rs.1,48,821/- received under the BSNL VRS Scheme, 2019, notwithstanding the fact that such exemption was not claimed in the original return of income and the amount was voluntarily offered to tax therein. The appellant has further raised the legal contention that the appellate authority is empowered to entertain and adjudicate a fresh claim, even if such claim was not made in the return of income, provided the relevant facts are already on record. Accordingly, the dispute in the present appeal centers around- (i) the admissibility of the fresh claim for exemption u/s 10(10B), and (ii) the taxability or otherwise of the ex-gratia compensation received by the appellant under the BSNL VRS Scheme, 2019. The assessee became aware of the legal position only after pronouncement of decision by ITAT Chandigarh Bench, in the case of Harish Kumar vide ITA No.42/Chd/2025, order dated 30.05.2025. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), but remained unsuccessful as the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, assessee is left with no other alternative but to knock on the doors of the Tribunal with this appeal praying for justice.

“3. Common and similar facts, contain in these appeals, are as follows. The amount was received by the respective employees of BSNL on account of Retrenchment Compensation Received From Central Government Under the Scheme Approved By Central Government which is fully exempted from Income Tax Under Section 10(10B) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The compensation amount receipts in the hands of assessee as an employee of the BSNL, pursuant to the severance package, titled as BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2019 announced by the Department of Telecommunications(DoT), Central Government of India under total budgetary allocation approved by the Government is a special privilege/protection package granted to the employees of the BSNL and therefore, the Second Proviso of the Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are attracted and accordingly, the same shall not fall within the definition of income, while computing the total income of an assessee and income tax not to be deducted from the severance package paid as an employee of DOT and BSNL Combined Service. However, the assessing officer rejected the above contention of these assessees/ employees and made the addition in the hands of the respective employees. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Assessing Officer, these assessees filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), but remained unsuccessful. Therefore, these assessees are left with no other alternative but to knock on the doors of the Tribunal with this appeal praying for justice. 5. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that in these cases the compensation received by an assessee is towards loss of employment for the reason of employer so it would amount to Capital Receipt and hence, no income tax is payable. The amount received is fully exempted u/s.10(10AA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In respect of leave encashment received by an Applicant. This is as per Revised Limit of Leave Encashment Rs.25,00,000/- as per CBDT, Notification No.31/2023/F.No.200/3/2023-ITA-1, Dated: 24/05/2023.The Ld. CIT(A) has misdirected himself in law, facts and circumstances of the case, that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the Appeal rejecting the claim of Assessee for exemption u/s 10(10B) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) did not examine the scheme framed by the Central Government for BSNL employees, therefore matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), with the direction to examine the scheme of the central government, and then adjudicate the issue in accordance with law. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR for the revenue did not raise any objection if these matters are remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for examination of the scheme of BSNL employees framed by the Central Government and then adjudicate the issue in accordance with law. 7. I have heard, both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that these appeals relate to Retrenchment Compensation/ retirement scheme of BSNL employees and Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the BSNL Scheme of retirement and without considering the scheme of BSNL employees’ the ld.CIT(A), dismissed these appeals of different assessees. The BSNL Scheme was approved by the Central Government and therefore Ld. CIT(A) should have considered the scheme approved by the Central Government for BSNL employees, however, the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider, at all, the BSNL Scheme for employees, as approved by the Central Government, therefore the decision rendered by the Ld. CIT(A) is factually incorrect and hence another opportunity to plead these cases before the Ld. CIT(A) should be granted to these all assessees. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has also not considered the case law cited by the assessees which are in favour of employees/assessees. I note that Ld. CIT(A) did not go through the scheme of the BSNL for its employees framed by the Central Government and adjudicated the issue without going through the scheme of BSNL, in right perspective, hence, it is violation of principle of natural justice. Therefore, these assessees pray before the Bench that the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to consider the scheme of the BSNL employees and to consider the case law in favour of these employees. Therefore, considering these facts, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to these assessees to plead their cases before the learned CIT(A). 8. Hence, I accept the prayer of these assessees and set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remand the various issues raised by the assessees in the grounds of appeal before CIT(A) for fresh consideration by the ld.CIT(A), with a liberty to these assessees to prove their cases by producing sufficient evidences/material to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(A). For statistical purposes these all different assessees’ appeals are allowed. 9. In the result, all these appeals (ITA No.1030/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1031/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1038/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1041/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1072/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1114/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1115/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1116/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1118/Rjt/2026, ITA No.1119/Rjt/2026), filed by the different assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open Court on 07/10/2026. Sd/- [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member //True Copy// Rajkot Date: 07/10/2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant  ��थ�/ The Respondent  आयकर आयु�/ CIT  आयकर आयु�(अपील)/ The CIT(A)  िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  गाड� फाईल/ Guard File By Order

Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot