9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in short SBI). They opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme as per Staff Exit Scheme of their employer SBI and in the returns of income filed for the year under consideration, exemption of Rs 5 lakhs was claimed by them u/s.10(10C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In the assessments completed u/s.143(3), the AO allowed the exemption claimed by the assessees u/s.10(10C) in view of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in WP No.1051 of 2010 in the case of Ravikant G. Seth vs. CIT rendered vide order dated 23.08.2010. By the said order, CIT-2, Thane was directed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court to consider whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption u/s.10(10C) of the Act and the Rules made under the Income-tax Rules, 1962. As per the direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He, therefore, set aside the said orders with a direction to the AO to frame the same de novo after withdrawing exemption of Rs. 5 lakhs granted to the assessees u/s.10(10C) of the Act as the requirement of Rule 2BA of IT Rules was not satisfied. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT passed u/s.263 setting aside and revising the orders of the AO, the assessees have preferred these appeals before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. Although the Ld. DR has strongly relied on the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT passed u/s.263 in support of the revenue's cases, it is observed that in paragraph no.5 of the said orders, the Ld. CIT himself has stated that nothing has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal cited by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee deciding the similar issue relating to exemption u/s.10(10C) in favour of the assessee clearly shows that the view taken by the AO while allowing the claim of the assessee for exemption u/s.10(10C) in the assessments framed u/s.143(3) was a possible view and the Ld. CIT, in our opinion, was not justified in treating the said assessments as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue relying on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI Exit Optees (supra) wherein no decision was rendered as to the admissibility of the claim of the petitioners on merit as agreed by the Ld. CIT himself in his impugned order passed u/s.263. We, therefore, set aside the impugned ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
