CHHAGANLAL BHIMABHAI DANGODARA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAVNAGAR

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. This Appeal is filled to quash and set aside the Ground No.1 of the Order passed u/s 250 by CIT(A) in Appeal No. NFAC/2019-20/10411225 vide DIN No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083555352(1) & Order dated: 11/12/2025 and may be pleased to grant the full tax exemption for the Amount Rs.16,53,076/- received during A.Y.2020-2021 by an assessee as this amount is Retrenchment Compensation Received From Central Government Under the Scheme Approved By Central Government is fully exempted from Income Tax Under Section 10(108) 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.

In the present case 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.

That Ld.CIT(A) has mi irected himself in law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has rejected the Appeal Ground no.1 without considering the request of the Assessee who has asked to give an opportunity to submit Oral Evidences through VDEO CONFERENCE (VC) facility as per Income Tax Provisions. Ld.CIT(A) has not given an opportunity to submit oral evidences to Income Tax Department through VIDEO CONFERENCE (VC) facility to Assessee. So the Adverse Order of CIT(A) without giving opportunity to submit oral evidences to Income Tax Department through VIDEO CONFERENCE is null and void.

The assessee was employed with Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), a Government of India enterprise. BSNL introduced the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS)-2019, which was duly approved and implemented by the Government. The assessee opted for this scheme and received compensation as per the terms of the VRS. Under the scheme, the assessee received Rs. 16,53,076/- as retrenchment compensation from the Central Government under the budgetary allocation approved by the Government of India. This compensation was granted as a special protection package to BSNL employees. Therefore, the second proviso to section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is applicable, and the said amount does not fall within the definition of income while computing the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, no tax is required to be deducted from the severance package received by the assessee as an employee of the DOT and BSNL combined service. Further, the grievance raised in the grounds of appeal does not arise from the order appealed against, as it is not a case where the assessee claimed exemption under section 10(10B) and the same was denied by the Assessing Officer.

Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the amount of Rs. 16,53,076/- received during AY 2020-21 represents retrenchment compensation received from the Central Government under a scheme

In light of the facts of the case, provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and judicial decisions in the matter as discussed above, I am constrained to conclude that the appellant has failed to submit any reasonable ground for condoning the inordinate delay of 1,396 days i.e almost four years in filing this appeal. Being bereft of any sufficient cause as envisaged in section 249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein.

Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned the delay and proceed to adjudicate the issue. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to lack of awareness of the legal provisions at the time of filing the return of income, the assessee inadvertently offered the compensation received under BSNL VRS-2019 to tax. Subsequently, based on the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Harish Kumar vs. ITO Ward 5(5), Chandigarh (ITA No. 42/CHD/2025 dated 30.05.2025), wherein compensation under the same BSNL VRS-2019 scheme was held to be exempt under section 10(10B), the assessee now seeks exemption of such compensation. We find that the assessee filed the claim before the Ld. CIT(A) and since the income of the assessee is not taxable, the assessee is eligible for the refund of the TDS. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed…” Since there is no change in the legal proposition and the factual matrix of the case, respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.