RAJKUMAR PAVANKUMAR SHARMA,MAKARPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(7), VADODARA

ITA 1821/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 February 2026AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member), SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, relying on the *Biswas Manik* precedent, held that the employer's contribution to LIC for a deferred annuity is not taxable as a perquisite in the year of contribution if the employee has no vested right and the annuity commences later, as this would lead to impermissible double taxation. The addition made by the CIT(A) was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an employee of GE Power India Ltd., took VRS. His employer paid Rs. 15 lakhs directly to LIC for a deferred annuity and Rs. 4.5 lakhs as tax on his behalf. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment, treating these amounts as perquisites, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

1. Whether employer's contribution to a deferred annuity plan is taxable as a perquisite in the year of contribution if no vested right accrues to the employee. 2. Whether tax paid by the employer on behalf of the employee is exempt under Section 10(10CC). 3. Validity of reassessment proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(10CC),Section 15,Section 17(2)(v),Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 147,Section 148,Section 151A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar Goyal, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 18.02.2026

PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 24.07.2025 passed for A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to provide an opportunity for a personal hearing via video conferencing, despite the appellant’s specific request.

2.

The Learned NFAC erred in disposing of the appeal without recognizing that the same income was alr

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10(10CC)

All 27 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(10CC) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →