9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C) - HELD THAT: - In view of the judgment in CHANDRA RANGANATHAN VERSUS CIT [2009 (10) TMI 498 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], we do not find any merit in the present writ appeal filed by the Revenue. The same is liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly, dismissed - W.A.(MD) No.1030 of 2015 and 1012 to 1015 of 2018 And M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2015 And C.M.P.(MD) Nos.7103 to 7106 of 2018 - - - Dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther companies or societies or State Government or Central Government, etc. subject to fulfilment of conditions as prescribed under Rule 2 B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/Revenue fairly submits that on merits, the controversy has been concluded by several decisions against the Revenue Department viz., in the leading judgment rendered by Bombay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the questions of law were left open. On the core question, the learned counsel for the Appellants/Revenue however could not point out any such material on the basis of which the exemption to the respondents assessees under Section 10(10C) of the Act deserved it to be denied in the present case also. 5.As far as the question of grant of exemption, an am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 8th May, 2009, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it was indicated that the matter had been reviewed on the basis of the judgment of the Bompay High Court dated 4th July, 2008, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Koodathil Kallyatan (2008) 219 CTR (Bom) 80 (2008) 12 DTR 138 and it was held that amounts received by retiring employees of the RBI would be eligible for exempti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
