KULDEEP SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(5) , CHNADIGARH
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that a subsequent rectification order under Section 154 allowed the ground in favor of the assessee, settling the grievance at the first appellate level.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed Rs.28.23 Lacs as retrenchment compensation under Section 10(10B) for an amount received upon transfer from DOT to BSNL. The lower authorities restricted this to Rs.5 Lacs, holding it was voluntary retirement compensation.
What were the issues?
Whether the compensation received was for retrenchment or voluntary retirement, and if a subsequent rectification order rendered the appeal infructuous.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH ‘SMC’, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Shri Kuldeep Singh ITO Ward No 5(5) बनाम/ H.No 34-D Sector 30B Aaykar Bhawan Sector 178 Vs. Chandigarh 160030 Chandigarh 160017 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AFDPS-0430-C (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 23-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 20-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. This appeal was heard on 23-04-2025 on the issue of deduction u/s 10(10B) as claimed by the assessee for Rs.28.23 Lacs which was restricted to Rs.5 Lacs by lower authorities. The impugned amount was received by the assessee upon transfer from DOT, Govt. of India to BSNL with effect from 01-01-2000. The assessee claimed that it was retrenchment compensation but Ld. CIT(A) held that it was case of voluntary retirement.
The Ld. AR, subsequently, placed on record rectification order passed by NFAC u/s 154 r.w.s. 250 of the Act on 12-11-2024 wherein this ground has been allowed in favor of the assessee. Accordingly, the grievance of the assessee has already been settled at the first appellate level. This being so, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous.
The appeal stand dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced on 20-05-2025.
More judgments on Section 10(10B)
- Indrani Chatterjee, Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward - 52(1), KolkataITA 2871/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- Tapan Mandal, Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward - 52(1), KolkataITA 2870/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- Saroj Kumar Haldar, Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward - 52(1), KolkataITA 2869/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- Saroj Kumar Haldar, Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward - 52(1), KolkataITA 2868/KOL/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Sarmistha Dey, Hooghly, West Bengal vs Income Tax Officer Ward 24(1), Hoogly…ITA 2864/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026