9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e during appellate proceedings and therefore, there was no bar for the Ld.CIT(A) to admit the claim and decide on merit. Accordingly, we admit the claim of the assessee for adjudication. Before us, assessee has relied upon the decision of Liyakatali Chhotumiya Saiyed vs ITO i[ 2023 (3) TMI 768 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] wherein the assessee was retired from Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited which was earlier a part of the Department of Communication, Government of India. The leave encashment received by the said assessee was directed to be allowed in proportionate of the services rendered in Government Department as well as Public Sector Undertakings. We find that facts of the instant case are exactly identical to the above case. The assessee was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of electricity act 2003 that such terms and conditions on the transfer shall not in any way be less favourable than those which would have been applicable to them if there had been no such transfer under the transfer scheme. 6. That the circumstances were beyond the control of assessee, as the transfer from State Government to Government Company was made by state Government. 7. That LD CIT(A) erred in not following the Jurisdictional MP High Court Decision (1983) 142 ITR 13 (MP) wherein it was held that rectification u/s 154 can be made even if the assessee omits to claim some relief in return of income. 8. That LD CIT (A) erred in relying on Goetze India LTD Judgement because it only talks about powers of assessing officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 184/- . The assessee filed its return of income through emode on 10.06.2016, declaring income of Rs. 25,55,890/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ), wherein the total income declared by the assessee was accepted. Subsequently, the assessee had filed a rectification application on 17.10.2017 claiming that the assessee was retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2016 i.e. Financial Year 2015-16 and received leave encashment of Rs. 12,32,184/- but claimed exemption for only Rs. 3,00,000/- in the return of income, whereas the assessee being earlier employed with Government of Madhya Pradesh, was entitled for the balance amount of the leave encashment of Rs. 9,32,184/- also. Howe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of M/s Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra), the appellate authorities can entertain any fresh claim filed by the assessee during appellate proceedings and therefore, there was no bar for the Ld.CIT(A) to admit the claim and decide on merit. Accordingly, we admit the claim of the assessee for adjudication. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Liyakatali Chhotumiya Saiyed vs ITO in ITA No.371/Ahd./2022 for Assessment Year 2019-20 dated 15.03.2023 wherein the assessee was retired from Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited which was earlier a part of the Department of Communication, Government of India. The leave encashment received by the said assessee was directed to be allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e view that the assessee had been in service under the Department of Telecommunication, Govt. of India and his stamps of appointment and pay-scale were governed by the Central Govt. Rules, framed all other such employees working in Govt. of India with effect from 24.04.1980 on adhoc basis and subsequently in permanent capacity vide order dated 22.06.1986 w.e.f 22.03.1983. The assessee was absorbed in MTNL, a Govt. of India Undertaking, w.e.f 01.10.2000 vide order dated 19.01.2004. I am of the view that as per the provisions of section 10(10AA)(1) of the Act, the assessee is entitled for exemption on the amount of leave encashment of leave earned during the period before absorption in MTNL as per section 10(10AA)(1) of the Act as applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed to calculate the exemption as per the provision of section 10(10AA)(ii) of the Act. Thus, the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby partly allowed. 5. We find that facts of the instant case are exactly identical to the above case decided by the Coordinate bench of Tribunal (supra). The assessee was admittedly employed with the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board which was a Government Organization, which later on converted into a company namely, Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Ltd., Jabalpur. Therefore, respectfully following the findings of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Liyakatali Chhotumiya Saiyed vs ITO (supra), we restore the matter back to the file of AO for determination of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
