M.Rajagopal, Trichy v. ITO, Trichy

ITA 2535/CHNY/2006 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 253521714 RSA 2006
Assessee PAN AAGPR3802B
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 2535/CHNY/2006
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 14 day(s)
Appellant M.Rajagopal, Trichy
Respondent ITO, Trichy
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 12-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 12-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 12-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 12-01-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 29-12-2006
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: C- BENCH:CHENN AI (BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE. ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER) 1. ITA NO.2535/MDS/06 2. ITA NO.2536/MDS/06 3. ITA NO.2537/MDS/06 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05) 1) SRI M.RAJAGOPAL 11 VELLALA ST. T.T.ROAD WORAIYUR TRICHY 620003 PAN AAGPR 3802B 2) SHRI PR.MUTHUKUMAR 5 PARAVANA NAGAR PALUVOAOR KOOTHUR PO. TRICHY-620016 PAN ADEPM 8730G 3) SRI RM.NELLAPPAN 91 A.4/3 GANDHI RD. SRINIVASA NAGAR II ST. THIRUVANAIKOIL TRICHY 620005 PAN AADPN 6521C VS. THE ITO WARD II(1) TRICHY (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANTS BY: RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.KEERTHIRAJAN SHRI B.SRINIVAS ITA NOS. 2535-7/MDS/06 2 ORDER PER ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THESE APPEALS ARE RECALLED MATTERS. THIS TRIBUNAL HAD RECALLED THE ORDERS EARLIER PASSED IN PURSUANCE OF MISCELLANEOU S PETITIONS FILED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSES AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEALS WE RE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING TODAY. 2. THE ASSESSEES HAVE RAISED A COMMON GROUND. THEIR GRIEVANCE IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF THEIR CLAIM FOR EXEMPTIO N UNDER SEC.10(10C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT FOR SHORT) ON T HE AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY THEM WHEN THEY OPTED FOR RETIREMENT UNDER THE OPTIO NAL EARLY RETIREMENT SCHEME (IN SHORT OERS) FRAMED BY M/S. ICICI BANK LTD. 3. SHORT FACTS APROPOS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEES WHO WERE ALL EMPLOYEES OF M/S ICICI BANK HAD TAKEN VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT T HEREFROM UNDER A OER SCHEME. ON THE SUMS RECEIVED ON SUCH RETIREMENT THEY HAD CLAIMED EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(10C) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE AO. FURTHER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES BEFORE THE CIT(A) DID NOT YIELD ANY FAVOURABLE RESULT. ITA NOS. 2535-7/MDS/06 3 4. NOW BEFORE US THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR IS T HAT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CHAN DRA RANGANATHAN & ORS. VS. CIT (326 ITR 49) ASSESSEES WERE ELIGIBLE F OR SUCH CLAIMS UNDER SEC. 10(10C) OF THE ACT. 5. PER CONTRA LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE DECISION O F HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA RANGANATHAN (SUPRA) WAS IN R ELATION TO AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY EMPLOYEES ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT FROM RBI AND NOT IN RELATION TO EMPLOYEES OF ICICI BANK LTD. ACCORDING TO THE LD . DR THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. N.CHELLADURAI & O RS.(317 ITR 370) HAD CLEARLY HELD THAT THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED UNDER THE OE RS FROM ICICI BANK BY EMPLOYEES OF THE SAID BANK WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBL E FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(10C) OF THE ACT. 6. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. HON.JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN N.CHELLADURAI & OR S. CASE (SUPRA) WAS CONSIDERING SEVEN TAX CASE APPEALS OF DIFFERENT ASS ESSES TOGETHER SUCH APPEALS BEING NUMBERED AS 101 419 22 425 1360 13 53 AND 1397 OF 2007. OF THESE TAX CASE APPEALS NO.101 419 22 425 & 1360 OF 2007 RELATED TO EMPLOYEES OF ICICI BANK WHEREAS TAX CAS E APPEAL NOS.1353 AND 1397 OF 2007 RELATED TO EMPLOYEES OF RBI. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SCHEMES OF THE RESPECTIVE BANKS AT PARAS 17 TO 21 O F ITS ORDER THE ITA NOS. 2535-7/MDS/06 4 HON.JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HELD THAT THERE WERE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE BANK OERS AND THE GUIDELINES LAID DOWN IN RULE 2BA OF THE I.T. RULES AND THEREFORE EXGRATIA PAID UNDER SUCH SCHEME DID NOT QUALIFY FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(10C) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER THE MATTER WAS CARRIED IN APPEAL TO THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT BY THE ASSESSEES WHO H AD TAKEN VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT FROM RBI ( I.E. THE RESPONDENTS IN TCA N OS.1353 & 1397 OF 2007 BEFORE THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT) AND IN I TS DECISION DATED 21-01- 2009 CAPTIONED AS CHANDRA RANGANATHAN & ORS. V. CIT (326 ITR 49) HONBLE APEX COURT HELD THAT CBDT BY ITS LETTER DAT ED 08-05-2009 HAD INDICATED OF A REVIEW THAT WAS DONE ON THE BASIS OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KO ODATHIL KALLYATAN AMBUJAKSHAN (309 ITR 113) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT EMPLOYEES RETIRING FROM RBI WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(10C) OF THE ACT. APPEALS OF THE ASSESSES WERE THUS ALLOWED BY THE HO NBLE APEX COURT. AS AFORESAID THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE APEX COURT AROSE OUT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N N.CHELLADURAIS CASE (SUPRA) WHICH WENT AGAINST THE ASSESSEES CONCERNED. THE REASONING GIVEN BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT FOR DECIDING A GAINST THE ASSESSEES FALLING IN THE SCHEMES FOR BOTH ICICI BANK AND RBI WAS THE VERY SAME. THEREFORE THE REVERSAL OF THE SAID DECISION BY HON BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA RANGANATHANS CASE (SUPRA) WOULD I N OUR HUMBLE OPINION OPERATE MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO ICICI BANK EMP LOYEES ALSO. IN THIS ITA NOS. 2535-7/MDS/06 5 VIEW OF THE MATTER WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF ICICI BANK WHO HAD TAKEN VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT UNDER THE OERS O F THE SAID BANK WERE ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10( 10C) OF THE ACT. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEALS OF ALL THE ASSESSES STAND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12-01-2011. SD/- SD/- ( GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI: 13TH JANUARY 2011 NBR CC: ASSESSEES/ ASSESSING OFFICER/ CIT(A)/ CIT/ D.R/ GUARD FILE.