TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 753X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of justice we set aside both the issues to the file of AO to decide the same after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee. Charging of Interest u/s 234D – Held that:- AO is directed to re-compute the same after giving effect to this order - appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.1949/Kol/2010 - - - Dated:- 4-6-2012 - Shri Mahavir Singh, And Shri C.D.Rao, JJ. For the Appellant: Shri B.Chakraborty For the Respondent: Shri Sujit Kumar ORDER Per Shri C.D.Rao, AM The above appeal is filed by assessee against order dated 30.08.2010 of the ld. CIT-(A)-XIV, Kolkata pertaining to A.Yr. 2003-04. 2. At the time of hearing the Bench pronounced as under :- 1.G.No.3 is allowed. 2. G.No.4 is set aside to AO for want of facts. 3. G.Nos.5 is set aside to AO for verification of facts. 4. G.No.1 2 are not pressed. Hence dismissed as not pressed. 5. G.No.6 is consequential. Charging of interest u/s 234D of the Act . Order pronounced in open court. Detailed order will follow. Now the detailed order is as follows : 3. In this appeal the assessee has taken the following grounds :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand of interest under Section 234 D of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the instant case and for that the impugned Order of the Ld. C.I.T.(A) is erroneous, arbitrary and bad in law in the instant case. 4. At the time of hearing the ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of assessee did not press Ground Nos. 1 and 2 raised by assessee. Hence the same are dismissed as not pressed. 5. Ground No.3 raised by assessee in this appeal is relating to disallowance of statutory exemption of Rs.5,00,000/- u/s 10(10C) of the IT Act. 6. The brief facts of this issue are that the AO disallowed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- claimed u/s 10(10C) of the IT Act by observing as under :- During the relevant previous year the assessee retired from ABN AMRO bank of 4, Russell Street, Kolkata. She claimed deduction of Rs.5,00,000/- u/s 10(10C) of the I.T.Act but no deduction u/s 10(10C) was allowed in the T.D.S. certificate in Form 16 issued by the bank. From the documents furnished in the course of hearing it appears that Basic Pay a of the assessee was Rs.17,769/- and months left for his normal retirement b was 104 months. The product of these two (axb) is Rs.18,47,976/-. As the assessee has received VRS Be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... served that this issue is covered in favour of assessee by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sail DSP VR Employees Association vs Union of India (supra) and the decisions of various ITAT Benches. Respectfully following the same we set aside the orders of the revenue authorities and allow the appeal of the assessee. 10. Ground No.4 raised by assessee is relating to disallowance of exemption of Rs.1,54,611/- on account of encashment of leave u/s 10(10AA) of the IT Act and ground no.5 raised by assessee is relating to disallowance of relief of Rs.28,029/- u/s 89(1) of the IT Act. 10.1. The brief facts of both the issues are that while doing the scrutiny assessment the AO has disallowed an amount of Rs.1,54,611/- u/s 10(10AA) of the IT Act and an amount of Rs.28,029/- in respect of relief u/s 89(1) of the IT Act by observing as under :- In the course of hearing Shri Nandy has furnished a revised computation sheet claiming deduction of Rs.1,54,611/- u/s 10(10AA) on Leave encashment and relief of Rs.28,029/- u/s 89(1) of the Act. No deduction has been allowed by the said bank u/s 10(10AA) in the ITS certificate. The assessee has not shown any calculation for arriving ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... half of assessee in respect of encashment of leave claimed u/s 10(10AA) by referring to the petition dated 10.08.2010 which are placed at pages 11and 12 of the paper book and by placing reliance on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of West Bengal State Warehousing Corporation vs CIT (1986) 157 ITR 149 (Cal) which are placed at pages 25 to 28 of the paper book requested to delete the addition made u/s 10(10AA) of the IT Act. 11.1. Regarding the disallowance of relief u/s 89(1) of the IT Act the ld. Counsel for assessee referred to the petition dated 10.08.2010 which are placed at pages 12 to 14 of the paper book. He relied on various case laws and requested to allow the claim of relief made u/s 89(1) of the IT Act. 12. On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing on behalf of the revenue relied on the orders of the revenue authorities. 13. After hearing the rival submissions and on careful perusal of materials available on record, in respect of claim u/s 10(10AA) of the IT Act as well as relief u/s 89(1) of the IT Act, it is observed the AO has disallowed the same by observing as under :- No deduction has been allowed by the said bank u/s 10(10AA) in the ITS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
