“Section 10(10)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(10)36 judgments

SRI BIDYADHAR DAS,BALASORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, BALASORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 761/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.761/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) Vs Ito Ward-1, Balasore Sri Bidyadhar Das, Kantabania, Shyamsundarpur, Balasore-765040 Pan No. :Aixpd 2899 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somanath Sahoo, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/02/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.10.2025 For The Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Is A Retired Person From Indian Army, Who Retired On 31.05.2018 During The Financial Year 2018-2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-2020. It Was The Submission That The Retirement Benefits Received By The Assessee Are Exempt From The Tax U/S.10(10) Of The Act But Due To Non-Compliance Of The Notice Issued By The Ld. Ao, The Assessment Has Been Completed Ex- Parte U/S.147 R.W.S.144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act. It Was The Prayer That The Matter May Be Restored To The File Of The Ao To Decide The Issue

For Appellant: Shri Somanath Sahoo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. DR

Section 10(10)Section 144BSection 147

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL

ANIL BHAGWAN TURUK,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 8(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2585/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2584 & 2585/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Anil Bhagwan Turuk, V Income Tax Officer, 431/2329, Sant Tukaram S Ward-8(3), Pune. Nagar, Pimpri, Haveli, Pune – 411018. Pan: Aappt2146K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2020-21 Dated 23.07.2025 & 28.08.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 13.09.2022 & Penalty Order Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 22.03.2023 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 89(1)

compensation f voluntary retirement, Section 10(10AA) of Rs 2,39,352/- in respect of earned leave encashment on retirement, Section 10(10) of Rs 4,45,185/- in respect of gratuity cum retirement of the Income Tax Act. 4. The Id CIT(A) erred

ANIL BHAGWAN TURUK,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 8(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2584/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 89(1)

BIJU PAPPACHAN,KERALA vs. AO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2153/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Akshatha Prasad, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R Ghale, D.R

Section 250

ITA No.2153/Bang/2025 Biju Pappachan, Kollam IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DNYANESHWAR SHINDE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1726/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GhumareFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist

Section 10Section 147

details of which are as under : Sr. No. Deductions or exemptions Amount (Rs.) 1 Section 10(10AA) 22,368 2 Section 10(10) 58,787 3 Section 10(10B) 52,052 4 Any other (Section 10(5)) 11,278 5 Compensation received claimed for Relief

SONIA PRAVIN RAJANI,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. - THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1968/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesonia Pravin Rajani, Nfac, Delhi Vs. A-102, Raj Avenue, Present Jurisdiction Nr. Sahjanand Bungalow, New Cg Income Tax Officer, Road, Ahmedabad-382 424 Ward 5(3)(2), [Pan : Ahupv 0872 C] Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Biren Shah, Ar Respondent Represented By: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

Section 10(10)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 4Section 80G

leave encashment of Rs.68,924/-, but confirmed the addition relating to gratuity amounting to Rs.1,51,216/-. 4. The provisions of Section 10(10) of the Act read as under:- “10. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income falling within ... clause (h) of rule 2 of Part A of the Fourth Schedule ;” In view of the above provisions of Section 10(10) of the Act, the Death-cum- Retirement Gratuity received by the assessee is exempt from tax. Accordingly, the addition of Rs.1,51,216/- made on this

SATINDER PAUL THROUGH L/H NEELAM SAINI,PINJORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

ITA 136/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

employer company, based on the decision of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, Government of India, is eligible for exemption under section 10(10 B) of the Act, is accepted. The addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 23,13,096/- is deleted. Appeal on this ground

VINOD KUMAR AJMERA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1228/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, C.A. (through V.CFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT a

Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

amount of Rs. 10,93,076/- was received by the appellant by way of leave encashment benefit in terms of section 10(10)AA of the Act, and that notification dated 24.05.2023 was issued by CBDT whereby the benefit was extended to non government employees by raising

CHANDRA PRAKASH VASHISTHA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(4), JPR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1139/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal, C.A. (through V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh, Addl. CIT a

Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

that an amount of Rs. 13,05,810/- was received by the appellant by way of leave encashment benefit in terms of section 10(10)AA of the Act, and that notification dated 24.05.2023 was issued by CBDT whereby the benefit was extended to non government employees

CHUNDAYIL KALAM GIRIJADEVI ,KERALASSERY vs. ITO WARD 1 & TPS, PALAKKAD

ITA 564/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Padmnathan K.VFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal

Section 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 4

1388/PUN/2023, ITAT Pune has set aside the penalty levied under section 270A where the appellant had claimed excess exemption under section 10(10) under a Bonafide belief. H. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the following cases have held: i. That for imposition of penalty, mens ... relevant to the Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessee filed return of income on 06/08/2018 claiming exemption of INR.10,00,000/- under Section 10(10) of the Act in respect of gratuity received on retirement. Thereafter, the Assessee filed a revised return claiming a higher exemption of INR.20

OM PRAKASH KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD-4(1), JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 887/JPR/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 887/JPR/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2022-2023 बनाम Vs. | | | |:---|:---| | OM Prakash Khandelwal | Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Jaipur. | | 7, Ekta Marg, Path No. -07, vijay Bari, Dher Ke Balaji, Sikar Road, Jaipur. | | | स्थायीलेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ADHPK9109L | | | अपीलार्थी / Appellant | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent | निधर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Mukesh Goyal,

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

that an amount of Rs. 15,16,271/- was received by the appellant by way of leave encashment benefit in terms of section 10(10)AA of the Act, and that notification dated 24.05.2023 was issued by CBDT whereby the benefit was extended to non government employees

SUJATA GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 915/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, C.A. (through V.C.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

that an amount of Rs. 14,24,413/- was received by the appellant by way of leave encashment benefit in terms of section 10(10)AA of the Act, and that notification dated 24.05.2023 was issued by CBDT whereby the benefit was extended to non government employees

SADULLA SYED NOORSHA SYED,NANDED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NANDED

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 167/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

balance amount of Rs.11,49,579/- shall be available to him as per the prescribed limits under the provisions of section 10(10)(ii) of the Act. The assessee has contended before us that the balance amount of retirement gratuity of Rs.11,49,579/- is also eligible

ASHWANI KUMAR SHARMA,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1 PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 652/CHANDI/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Section 10Section 10(10)(i)Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

gone through\nthe material available on the record, to resolve the present controversy it is relevant to\ndiscuss the provisions contained in Section 10(10)(i), (ii) & (iii) of the Act which read as\nunder:\n\"(10) (i) any death- 'cum- retirement gratuity received under the revised ... nwhich were available before their transfer i.e. when they were the employee of the\nState Government. As per the provisions contained in Section 10(10)(i) of the Act,\nthe exemption was available for death-cum-retirement gratuity to the employees of\nthe State Government, therefore, the assessee

GYANESH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1516/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

TRIMBAK SHRIPAD DHARURKAR,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 4(4), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2633/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2025AY 2018-19

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें।\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nPUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE

SANJEEV CHOPRA,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 71(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6066/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sanjeev Chopra, Vs. Ito, L3/502, Emmar, The Views, Ward-71(1), Sector-105, Mohali, Punjab New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacpc6094L Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Revenue By: Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/05/2025

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S

VALLOLI SHEELA,PALAKKAD vs. ITO,WARD 2, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee sands dismissed

ITA 1047/COCH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2022-23 Valloli Sheela .......... Appellant 4/763, Navami Velloli Lane Puthur, Palakkad 678001 [Pan: Ajzps6681D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Palakkad .......... Respondent T Appellant By: Shri Pathmanathan, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Pathmanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2022-23 Valloli Sheela

RAVI DINKARRAO AGRELWAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 468/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: MS. Alfiya Rozie, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.468/NAG./2024

MR NAGARAJAN CHANDRASHEKHAR,MUMBAI vs. INTERNATIONAL TAX WARD-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4100/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Modi, CA (Virtually appear)

Section 10(10)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

erred in not giving deduction of the gratuity of Rs. 10,00,000/- being exempt under section 10(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for AY 2016-17. Since ... deducted on the same after giving exemption to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- as per the provisions of section 10(10) of the Act. The ld. AR in this regard drew our attention to the Form-16 issued by the Employer (page 66 of Paper

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2