9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 289X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court was delivered by 1. R. M. LODHA J.— The Revenue has preferred this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur passed on April 28, 2006, in group of matters. 2. The short question that has been raised in this appeal is as to whether the relief under section 89 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is admissible to the assessee on the voluntary retirement scheme amount in excess of the exemption under section 10(10C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 3. It is not in dispute that the assessee, who was an employee of UCO Bank ("the employer"), took the voluntary retirement in the financial year 2001-02 under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001 (fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order by the Board in exercise of the power conferred under sub-rule (6) declining relief under section 89, the assessee was not entitled to the relief under section 89 of the Income-tax Act. He would submit that the judgment of the Madras High Court delivered in the case of CIT v. M. Raman [2000] 245 ITR 856, cannot be applied in the present situation as the statutory provision of section 10(10C) of the Income-tax Act was not in existence at the time when the said judgment was delivered. 5. That the amount received by the assessee on voluntary retirement is covered by section 17(3)(i) of the Income-tax Act cannot be doubted. "Profits in lieu of salary" includes the amount of any compensation received by an assessee from his employer i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of M. Raman [2000] 245 ITR 856 (Mad). Counsel for the Revenue, however, submits that despite the best efforts, he has not been able to get any information in this regard and, therefore, he is not in a position to make any statement in this regard. Be that as it may, once it is held that the amount received by the assessee on voluntary retirement under VRS is covered by section 17, we see no impediment in the assessee getting benefit of section 89 of the Income-tax Act irrespective of the amount up to Rs. 5 lakhs being exempt under section 10(10C). The relief under section 89 of the Income-tax Act is entirely different and cannot be denied merely because an amount up to Rs. 5 lakhs received on voluntary retirement is exempted under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me-tax Act, 1961. This court in the case of CIT v. J. Visalakshi [1994] 206 ITR 531, held that if an employee receives at the time of resignation, the amount could be regarded as salary and the assessee would be entitled to relief provided under section 89 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The said principle rendered by this court in the case of resignation would equally apply to the case of voluntary retirement of an employee from service. Accordingly, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amount received by the employee at the time of voluntary retirement of service would be regarded as salary, and the relief under section 89 of the income-tax Act, 1961, would be admissible in respect of the amount received by the assessee from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
