9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 678X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act contemplated rupees ten lakhs as the amount of gratuity only from 24.5.2010. Such gratuity is the amount payable only once. Thus, the cut-off date cannot be said to be illegal, it being one-time payment. Therefore, such amendment in the Gratuity Act cannot be treated to be retrospective. Therefore, the provisions of the statute cannot be said to be retrospective In a recent judgment reported as Himachal Road Transport Corporation Anr. v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Union [ 2021 (2) TMI 1190 - SUPREME COURT] in the case of payment of increased quantum of death-cum-retirement gratuity, it was held that the cutoff date cannot be said to be arbitrary which was fixed keeping in view financial constraints Thus we find that the date of commencement fixed by the Executive in exercise of power delegated by the Amending Act cannot be treated to be retrospective as the benefit of higher gratuity is one-time available to the employees only after the commencement of the Amending Act. The benefit paid to the appellants under the office memorandum is not entitled to exemption in view of specific language of Section 10(10)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. No error ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income Tax Act would be necessary to be extracted: The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 4. Payment of Gratuity (1) Gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years,- xx xx xx Provided that the completion of continuous service of five years shall not be necessary where the termination of the employment of any employee is due to death or disablement: xx xx xx (3) The amount of gratuity payable to an employee shall not exceed ten lakh rupees. xx xx xx (5) Nothing in this section shall affect the right of an employee to receive better terms of gratuity under any award or agreement or contract with the employer. The Income Tax Act, 1961 10. Incomes not included in total income. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income falling within any of the following clauses shall not be included 1. xx xx xx 10 (ii). any gratuity received under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (39 of 1972), to the extent it does not exceed an amount calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o deny the retirees pension before the cut-off date is arbitrary. It was thus argued that benefit of gratuity stands on different footing, then recurring right of payment of pension. This Court held as under: 38. What then is the purpose in prescribing the specified date vertically dividing the pensioners between those who retired prior to the specified date and those who retire subsequent to that date? That poses the further question, why was the pension scheme liberalised? What necessitated liberalisation of the pension scheme? xx xx xx 42. If it appears to be undisputable, as it does to us that the pensioners for the purpose of pension benefits form a class, would its upward revision permit a homogeneous class to be divided by arbitrarily fixing an eligibility criteria unrelated to purpose of revision, and would such classification be founded on some rational principle? The classification has to be based, as is well settled, on some rational principle and the rational principle must have nexus to the objects sought to be achieved. We have set out the objects underlying the payment of pension. If the State considered it necessary to liberalise the pension scheme, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tirement. We respectfully agree with the views expressed in those decisions. It is also not shown that the Government notification in question either expressly or by necessary implication directs that those who had retired prior to 1-1- 1973 would be entitled to any additional amount by way of gratuity. The Tribunal was, therefore, in error in upholding that gratuity was payable in accordance with the Government Notification No. 33/12/73-AISC(ii) dated 24-1- 1975 to all those members of the All-India Services who had retired prior to 1-1-1973. 12. Sub-section (5) of Section 4 of the Gratuity Act protects the right of an employee to receive better terms of gratuity under any award or contract with the employer. The gratuity paid to the appellants on the strength of office memorandum dated 26.11.2008 would fall in the said sub-section. 13. However, what is exempt from the Income Tax Act is the amount of gratuity received under the Gratuity Act to the extent it does not exceed an amount calculated in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 4 of the Gratuity Act. The Gratuity Act contemplated rupees ten lakhs as the amount of gratuity only from 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Corporation Anr. v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Union (2021) 4 SCC 502 , in the case of payment of increased quantum of death-cum-retirement gratuity, it was held that the cutoff date cannot be said to be arbitrary which was fixed keeping in view financial constraints. This Court held as under: 18. Though there are long line of cases, where validity of fixation of cut-off date is considered by this Court, we confine and refer to the case law which is relevant to the facts of the case on hand. In State of Punjab v. Amar Nath Goyal [State of Punjab v. Amar Nath Goyal , (2005) 6 SCC 754 : 2005 SCC (L S) 910] , while examining the validity of cut-off date fixed for grant of benefit of increased quantum of death-cum-retirement gratuity, this Court has held that the financial constraint pleaded by the Government, was a valid ground for fixation of cut-off date and such fixation was not arbitrary, irrational or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution . 17. In view of the above, we find that the date of commencement fixed by the Executive in exercise of power delegated by the Amending Act cannot be treated to be retrospective as the benefit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
