9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... satisfied? - Held that:- An employee opting for voluntary retirement and the amount received on voluntary retirement shall be entitled to exemption under Section 10(20C) of the Act, however, up to the limit of ₹ 5 lacs and for the amount beyond ₹ 5 lacs shall be entitled to the relief under Section 89 of the Act. See CIT Versus Nagesh Devidas Kulkarni [2007 (4) TMI 205 - BOMBAY High C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing exemption under Section 10(10C) of the I.T. Act 1961 even though conditions laid down in Rule 2BA of the I.T. Rules 1962 that the vacancy caused by such retirement was not to be filled up was not satisfied? B. Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in law in not taking cognizance of RBI letter dated 05/03/2005 vide No.REF.Est(AH) No.3110/OERS/04- 05 which clearly stated that the bank, has k ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the authorities below and allowed the exemption claimed by the respective assessee under Section 10(10C) of the Act up to ₹ 5 lacs and under Section 89 of the Act for above ₹ 5 lacs. Subsequently, the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Koodathil Kallyatan Ambujakshan reported in [2009] 309 ITR 113 (Bom) had an occasion to consider the exemptions claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued a circular dated 08/05/2009 in line with the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Koodathil Kallyatan Ambujakshan (Supra). It is brought to our notice that subsequently the Madras High Court in the case of V. Natesan Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2012] 347 ITR 645 (Mad) had an occasion to consider the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes 08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
