Shri Paranjape Ramesh P., Karad v. ITO, Ward 4, Satara, Satara

ITA 1752/PUN/2007 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 175224514 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AAUPP6512A
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 1752/PUN/2007
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 14 day(s)
Appellant Shri Paranjape Ramesh P., Karad
Respondent ITO, Ward 4, Satara, Satara
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 07-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 07-01-2011
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 24-12-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B PUNE BEFORE SHRI I C SUDHIR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1752/PN/07 (ASSTT YEAR: 2001-02) SHRI PARANJAPE RAMESH P SATARA .. APPELLANT PAN AAUPP6512A VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-4 SATARA .. RESP ONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI M K KULKARNI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HEMANTKUMAR C LEUVA ORDER PER G.S. PANNU A.M: THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I PUNE DATED 5.9.2007 WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 28.2.2006 PASS ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. THE ONLY DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO AN A MOUNT OF RS 2 00 000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS RETIREMENT B ENEFITS WHICH WAS CLAIMED AS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE ACT . THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE REJECTED THE SAID CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE AND HENCE THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. BEFORE US IT WAS A COMMON POINT BETWEEN THE PA RTIES THAT SIMILAR ISSUE RELATING TO THE VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT SCHEME OF THE COMPANY ITA NO 1752/PN/07 SHR I PARANJAPE RAMESH P SATARA 2 M/S KIRLOSKAR COPELAND LTD. AVAILED BY THE ABOVE AS SESSEE WAS SUBJECT MATTER OF CONSIDERATION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI PAWANE DADA BIRU & OTHERS VIDE ITA NO 1284/PN/04 ETC. PERTAI NING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 DATED 29.10.2010. THE HONBLE TRIBUNA L BY MAKING FOLLOWING DISCUSSION VIDE PARA 5 OF ORDER RESTORE D THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSE OF EX AMINING THE VOLUNTARY SCHEME UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE IMPUGN ED AMOUNT AND THEREAFTER CONSIDERING THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 10(10C) OF THE ACT: 5. SINCE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS EXAMINED TH E VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT SCHEME IN DETAIL AND GAVE THE JUDGMENT O N A PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES STATING THAT THE SCHEME I TSELF HAS NOT EXPRESSLY STATED ALL THE TERMS AND IT IS POSSIBLE FOR THE COU RT TO READ THE IMPLIED TERMS OF THE SCHEME. THIS JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE B OMBAY HIGH COURT WAS ALSO APPROVED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN T HE CASE OF CHANDRA RANGANATHAN AND OTHERS V CIT (2010) 326 ITR 49 (SC). SIMILAR WAY WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE VOLUNTARY RETIR EMENT SCHEME OF THE COMPANY M/S KIRLOSKAR COPELAND LTD. AVAILED BY THE ABOVE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE READ KEEPING IN MIND THE PRINCIPLES ESTAB LISHED BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE A RE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS MATTER CAN BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O TO EXAMINE THE OPTIONAL EARLY RETIREMENT SCHEME OF THE COMPANY AND WHETHER ALL THE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED AS PRESCRIBED IN RULE 2BA. FOR THIS PURPOSE WE RESTORE THE APPEALS BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A. O FO R THE PURPOSES OF EXAMINING THE SCHEME AND ALLOWING EXEMPTION UNDER C LAUSE (10C) OF SECTION 10 AS PER FACTS AND LAW AVAILABLE AT THE RE LEVANT POINT OF TIME AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. SINCE W E ARE RESTORING THE ISSUE FOR THE ABOVE STATED REASONS WE REFRAIN FROM COMMENTING ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE AT OUR HAND. 4. FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENT WHICH HAD BE EN RENDERED UNDER IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES CAPTIONED APPEAL IS ALSO RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DEC IDED IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE SAID PRECEDENT. 5. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO 1752/PN/07 SHR I PARANJAPE RAMESH P SATARA 3 6. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT I N THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF H EARING OF THE APPEAL ON 7 TH JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (I C SUDHIR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED: 7TH JANUARY 2011 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE ITO WD 4 SATARA 3) THE CIT (A)II PUNE 4) THE CIT III PUNE 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE B BENCH I .T.A.T. PUNE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASST. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T. PUNE B