← All Phrases

“Section 17(3)(i)”

Section References (mined)Section 17Section 17(3)(i)23 judgments

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

qualify for exemption u/s 10(10)(iii) of the Act. This amount is fully taxable as ―profits in lieu of salary‖ under section 17(3) of the Act. 7.4 In light of the above mentioned facts the submissions furnished by the appellant on 03.03.2025 & 28.04.2025 are not found tenable ... employer to pay further amount to assessee in terms of any service rule. it would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. The impugned addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforesaid point is accordingly determined against the revenue department

SUPRIYA NAGENDLA,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1521/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1521/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Smt. Supriya Nagendla Vs. Income Tax Officer Secunderabad Ward 4(1) Pan:Aaupn8127B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Assessee Smt. Supriya Nagendla राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Abhinav Pitta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Smt. Supriya Nagendla (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 05.08.2025 For The A.Y 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Assessee Smt. Supriya NagendlaFor Respondent: : Shri Abhinav Pitta, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17(3)

assessee had received Rs.26,97,912/- towards Severance Compensation and claimed the entire severance compensation as exempt income. The Ld. AO, relying on section 17(3) of the Act, held that severance compensation received after cessation of employment is fully taxable as “profits in lieu of salary”, unless specifically exempted ... assessee is taxable or exempt under the Act. In this regard, it is crucial to go through the provision contained under section 17(3) of the Act, which is to the following effect: “Salary”, “perquisite” and “profits in lieu of salary” defined. 17. For the purposes of sections

KALYANASUNDARAM RANJITHKUMAR,THIRUVARUR vs. ITO, NCW-22(6), TAMBARAM

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

ITA 1622/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1622/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Kalyanasundaram Ranjithkumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 2/46A, Keela Padugai Po, Non Corporate Ward 22(6), Thiruvarur 610 109. Tambaram. [Pan:Aimpr1914L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 489 Days. The Assessee Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons In Support Of An Affidavit. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, I Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which 2

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT
Section 10Section 17(3)Section 89

employer to pay further amount to assessee in terms of any service rule. it would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. The impugned addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforesaid point is accordingly determined against the revenue department ... further amounts to the assessee in terms of any service rule and therefore, would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3) of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The grounds raised

SUBRAMANIAN KATHIRSEN,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), AURANGABAD

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

ITA 765/CHNY/2025[19-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Sept 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.765/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 56(2)(xi)Section 89Section 89(1)

employer to pay further amount to assessee in terms of any service rule. it would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. The impugned addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforesaid point is accordingly determined against the revenue department ... further amounts to the assessee in terms of any service rule and therefore, would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3) of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The grounds raised

IMRAN AZAD WALLANI,HYDERABAD. vs. ITO., WARD-8(1), SIGNATURE TOWERS, HYDERABAD.

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

ITA 720/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17(3)(i)

compensation for termination of employment, but rather as a voluntary ex gratia amount, which is not covered under the deeming provisions of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. 7. Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) submitted that the payment received by the assessee was clearly ... nature of compensation for cessation of employment, and therefore squarely falls within the ambit of section 17(3)(i) of the Act, which deems such compensation as taxable salary income. The Ld. DR ITA No.720/Hyd/2025 5 relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Yatindra

PARNA VASUDEVAIAH,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 456/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ambarnath Bhimrao Khule-DR
Section 143(2)Section 17(3)(i)Section 89Section 89(1)

retirement in full and final settlement, the amount received by the assessee was properly assessable as salary income. As per the provisions of Section 17(3) (i) of the Income-tax Act it was profit in lieu of salary and hence it is assessable under the head "Salary". The same ... said amount on voluntary retirement in full and final settlement which is taxable as profits in lieu of salary under the provisions of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the order

MARUTI KESHAVRAO DIDHORE,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 449/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ambarnath Bhimrao Khule-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 89

receipt which is not taxable and\nnot profit in lieu of salary taxable in the hands of the assessee\nunder the provisions of section 17(3)(i) of the Act as alleged by the\nLd. AO. The Addl/JCIT(A) did not find the submissions of the\nassessee as tenable ... Rs.5 lakhs under section 10(10C) VRS compensation/\ntermination of service and balance remaining amount as capital receipt\nAssessing Officer taxed amount under section 17(3)(iii) by treating it as\nadditional compensation received by assessee from his employer as profit\nin lieu of salary under section 17(3

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

claim of the assessee was denied, learned CIT(A) held that such amount received by the assessee forms part of income under section 17(3)(i) of the Act. In appeal, the Tribunal considered the case of the assessee in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta

GODAVARI VIJAY KULKARNI (L/H OF LATE VIJAY KULKARNI),AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 1159/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak and Ms. Arrchena ShettyFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR
Section 33(4)

employer to pay further amount to assessee in terms of any service rule. it would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. The impugned addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforesaid point is accordingly determined against the revenue department ... further amounts to the assessee in terms of any service rule and therefore, would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3) of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The grounds raised

SHRIKANT ANANTRAO ZORI,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 798/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri Nikhil Patakh &For Respondent: \nShri Arvind Desai
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 89

been held \"Admittedly, the amount\nwas received by the assessee after cessation of his employment with the\nemployer company. In the normal course, section 17(3)(iii) of the Act would\napply and the payment would be covered within the definition of profit in lieu\nof salary as brought ... same being voluntary\nin nature and without any obligation on the part of the employer, would not\namount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(1) of the Act. The Tribunal\nwas, therefore, not justified in holding that the amount of Rs.3,51,308/-\nreceived by the appellant pursuant

SHIVABASAPPA KARIYAPPANAVAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1537/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2024AY 2017-18
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

opinion of ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1,\nChandigarh, these receipts comes under the definition of “Profit in lieu of\nsalary" as per provision of section 17(3)(i) of the Act which provides that the\namount of any compensation due to be received by an assessee from his\nemployer or former ... dated 03/10/2024.\nBefore proceeding further, it is appropriate to take note of section 15,\nSection 17(1) of the Act as well as section 17(3)(i) of the Act for the purpose\nof this case which reads as under:\nSalaries.\n15. The following income shall be chargeable to income

SUNIL VISHNU GAIKWAD ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4506/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrisunil Vishnu Gaikwad V/S. Ito Ward 42(3)(4), बनाम 4/32, Century Colony, P B Mumbai Marg, Near Doordarshan C41-43, G Block Bkc, Worli, Worli, Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400030 Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Ajepg5251G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad
Section 17(3)(i)Section 192Section 234CSection 244ASection 250Section 89(1)

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

SUDHAKAR RATAN SHANKER GAUTAM,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1033/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1033/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sudhakar Ratan Shanker The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Gautam Ward-1(1)(3) V/S. F-93, Tirthdham Apartment Ahmedabad Nr. Surel Flats, Bodakdev Ahmedabad – 380 054 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Ahapg 7698 F (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Bhavna Gupta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Bhavna Gupta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 17(3)Section 17(3)(i)Section 234ASection 270A

Asst. Year : 2018-19 dated 19/01/2021, wherein the AO made an addition of Rs.15,50,905/- as "profits in lieu of salary" under Section 17(3) of the Act. 2. The assessee, an individual, was employed with You First Money Express Private Limited, which was subsequently acquired by Ebix Money ... Section 143(1) on 01/05/2019. 2.1. The AO, in the order dated 19/01/2021, treated this amount as "profits in lieu of salary" under Section 17(3) of the Act, and added it to the total income of the assessee, leading to an assessed income of Rs.22

PARVEZ MUKHTAR KHAN,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1111/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 17(3)Section 17(3)(i)Section 89

part salary for the month of relieving is taxable in the hands of the employee as profit in lieu of salary under section 17(3) of the I T Act and 12 ITA.No.1111/PUN./2024 is taxable on due basis or receipt basis, whichever is earlier. 4.3.4 The case laws ... from the employment constitutes “resignation” and does not constitute “retrenchment” or “termination of employment” by the Company”. 14. Referring to the provisions of section 17(3) of the Act, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the same are not applicable to the facts of the assessee, which reads

ATUL SHASHIKANT GARBHE ,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD

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

ITA 863/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak and Ms. Arrchena ShettyFor Respondent: Shri A.D. Kulkarni, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 89

clear that any additional compensation/severance received by an employee from employer taxed as "Profit in lieu of salary" under Section 17(3) of Income Tax Act. Therefore, any compensation due to or received by a person from his employer in connection with termination of his employment is taxable as salary ... upon by the assessee, it is stated that they ate applicable to the period prior to the insertion of Clause (iii) inserted in Section 17(3) by the Finance Act 2001 w.e.f 1st April, 2002. 5. Section 17(3) Profits in lieu of salary" includes (i) the amount

PRASAD VIJAYKUMR KULKARNI ,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 850/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak and Ms. Arrchena ShettyFor Respondent: Shri A.D. Kulkarni, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 89

himself declared his income under the head Income from Salary as is evident from his ITR. 10.11 Further, as per provision of section 17(3)(i) of the I.T. Act "The amount of any compensation due to or received by an assessee from his employer or former employer ... employer to pay further amount to assessee in terms of any service rule. it would not amount to compensation in terms of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. The impugned addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The aforesaid point is accordingly determined against the revenue department

ASHOK RAGHUNATHRAO KULKARNI,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 117/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 17(3)Section 89

part salary for the month of relieving is taxable in the hands of the employee as profit in lieu of salary under section 17(3) of the I T Act and is taxable on due basis or receipt basis, whichever is earlier. 4.3.4 The case laws referred by the appellant ... from the employment constitutes “resignation” and does not constitute “retrenchment” or “termination of employment” by the Company”. 14. Referring to the provisions of section 17(3) of the Act, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the same are not applicable to the facts of the assessee, which reads

RAJINDER SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result appeal is allowed

ITA 5176/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2007-08 Rajinder Sharma, Vs. Acit, 1205B, Beverly Park-Ii, Gurgaon Dlf City Phase Ii, Gurgaon – 122009. Pan Aibps7516G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajinder Sharma in personFor Respondent: Ms. Mayuri, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 17(3)Section 17(3)(i)Section 17(3)(iii)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 28

profits in lieu of salary”. In fact payments were capital receipts and could not have been included as payment in lieu of salary. Section 17(3)(i) would reveal that the same is applicable to receipts from any person after cessation of his employment with that person. However ... present case the assessee was not employed with the companies qua whom the payments were made to them. Section 17(3)(iii) of the Income Tax Act reads as under:- “With effect from Assessment year 2002-03 the definition of profits in lieu of salary, in section 17(3

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. AVIROOK SEN, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6659/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) allowed assessee's appeal and set aside AO's addition thereby leading to this appeal.

Section 143(3)Section 17Section 17(3)Section 17(3)(i)Section 17(3)(iii)

taxman 265 (Delhi) as the assessment in that case was pertaining to the A.Y. 2001-02 i.e. before the insertion of Section 17(3)(iii) in the Act with Page 3 of 7 effect from 01.04.2002. He has further argued that the Ld. AO was right in carrying ... sympathetic grounds or otherwise, such payment is not to be treated as profit in lieu of salary under sub clause (i) of section 17(3). He has further submitted that the AO has made the addition by specifically relying on sub-clause (i) of Section 17(3) and at this

GUDIPATI SRINIVASA RATNA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 10/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Kali Kiran Kumar Kovvada, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 10Section 15

claim of the assessee was denied, learned CIT(A) held that such amount received by the assessee forms part of income under section 17(3)(i) of the Act. In appeal, the Tribunal considered the case of the assessee in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2