SMT. INDRA KUMARI BAJAJ THROUGH L/H SH. THAKUR DASS BAJAJ,HISAR vs. ITO, HISAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that employees of the State University are treated at par with State Government employees for exemption purposes. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the claimed exemption for gratuity and leave encashment.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a retired employee of a State University, claimed exemption for gratuity and leave encashment under Sections 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i). The Assessing Officer restricted the exemption, leading to an addition to the returned income. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's action.
What were the issues?
Whether employees of a State University are eligible for the same exemptions on gratuity and leave encashment as State Government employees. Whether reassessment proceedings were validly initiated.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 10(10)(i),Section 10(10AA)(i),Section 147,Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The appeal is filed by the assessee, against the order dated 29.01.2016 passed by the CIT(A), Hissar for A.Y. 2011-12.
The grounds of appeal are as under:
“On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming following action of the Assessing Officer in: i) initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and completing assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Act at an income of Rs.2067650/-against the returned income in a sum of Rs.968600/-; ii) initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of change of opinion without there being any reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; iii) passing order u/s 147/143(3) of the Act without disposing of the objection to reopening by speaking order; iv) making an addition of Rs.6,50,000/- and Rs. 4,49,050/- on account of gratuity and Leave encashment received from the State Government after retirement by restricting the exemption claimed u/s 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Act to Rs.3,50,000/-.”
Return declaring an income of Rs. 13,13,930/- was filed on 29.07.2011 which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the returned income. The assessee was employee of the Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, a State University, established under ‘The Haryana and Punjab Agricultural Universities Act, 1970’ and notified under University Grants Commission. The assessee retired on 31.03.2010. After retirement during the assessment year 2011-12, the assessee received Gratuity amounting to Rs.6,50,000/- and Leave Encashment amounting to Rs. 449050/-, and claimed exemption u/s 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Gratuity and leave encashment amount was claimed exempt income in the return being State University and its employees are treated at par with the State Govt, employee for all purposes, as per section 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Income tax Act, 1961. In response to notice u/s 148, appellant had submitted reply that original return already submitted be treated in response to notice u/s 148. Thereafter, notice was issued for reassessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 and reassessment was made by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 30.01.2014. The Assessing Officer restricted the exemption on account of Gratuity and leave encashment u/s 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Act and made the addition in the returned income as per detail given below:-
Returned Income 968600.00 Addition on account of Gratuity 650000.00 Addition on account of Leave encashment 449050.00 Total Income assessed 2067650.00
Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The appeal was dismissed on the ground that the assessee was an employee of Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, which is not a State Govt.
The Ld. AR submitted that the assessment was framed u/s 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961. No notice u/s 143(2) for assessment was issued within six months from the end of the assessment year. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 03-10-2013 without service of copy of reasons initiated before proceedings u/s 147 of the Income tax Act, 1961. In response to notice u/s 148, the assessee had submitted reply that original return already submitted be treated in response to notice u/s 148. Thereafter, notice was issued for reassessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 and reassessment was made by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 30-01-2014. Gratuity and leave encashment amount was claimed exempt income in the return being State University and its employees are treated at par with the State Government, employee for all purposes, as per section 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee retired from service before 24.05.2010. The Ld. AR submitted that this issue is considered by the Tribunal in number of cases wherein the Tribunal has granted relief in favour of assessees who were working in the Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, a State University, established under ‘The Haryana and Punjab Agricultural Universities Act, 1970’ and notified under University Grants Commission. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of Ram Kanwar Rana vs. ITO being order dated 16.06.2016.
The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and the Assessment Order.
We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. As regards to Ground Nos. (i) to (iii) relating to initiation of reassessment proceedings is not pressed by the Ld. AR, hence dismissed. It is pertinent to note that the assessee was an employee of Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, a State University, established under ‘The Haryana and Punjab Agricultural Universities Act, 1970’ and notified under University Grants Commission. The Tribunal in case of Ram Kanwar Rana (supra) held that the exemption u/s 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Act are available to the assessee in respect of the arrears of gratuity and dismissed the grounds about the initiation of the re-assessment. Similar view has been taken in several decisions including Raghubir Singh Panghal vs. ITO in ITA No. 1308/Del/2016. As in the present case also the assessee is found to be an employee holding a civil post under a State, therefore, the provisions of Section 10(10)(i) of the Act are attracted in this case and the assessee is entitled to exemption in respect of gratuity amount received in total upto Rs. 10 lac which covers a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- received during the year. As regards the arrears of leave encashment, it is also on the same footing to that of exemption claimed under Section 10(10)(i). Therefore, the assessee is entitled for the exemption claimed under Section 10(10)(i) and 10(10AA)(i) of the Act. The CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer was not right in disallowing the same. Thus, Ground No. (iv) is allowed.
In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
More judgments on Section 10(10)(i)
- Anant Chintaman Gundalwar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward-1 Chandrapur, ChandrapurITA 270/NAG/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026AY 2020-2021
- Narendra Ramchandra Deshpande, Wardha vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, WardhaITA 507/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
- Ramesh Harishankar Tiwari, Nagpur vs ITO, Ward 2, ChandrapurITA 587/NAG/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed4 Feb 2025AY 2021-22
- Anil Kumar Pruthi, Hisar vs ITO, Ward-1, HisarITA 691/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Dec 2024AY 2013-14
- Suresh Kumar Arora, Hisar vs ACIT, HisarITA 22/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed2 Jan 2024AY 2010-11
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026