Loading judgment…
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.
Held
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.
Key Issues
Whether the compensation received was for retrenchment or voluntary retirement, and if a subsequent rectification order rendered the appeal infructuous.
Sections Cited
10(10B), 154, 250
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.