TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter getting relieved from service. Though, the assessee was not immediately retired from the service and continued with the employment with his employer, yet, the basic intent and purpose of the aforesaid payment to the assessee was that of payment towards commuted pension to the employees. Though, generally the retrial benefits are paid on retirement from service, however, under certain circumstances, employment may be continued subject to payment of retrial benefits. The aforesaid payment to the assessee was nothing but the payment of retiral benefits towards Commuted Pension. We, therefore, are of the view that the lower authorities were not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 10(10A)(ii). The action of the lower a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9-20. 3. A perusal of above grounds of appeal reveals that the assessee has agitated the action of the lower authorities in making / upholding the disallowance of claim made by the assessee u/s 10(10A)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') of ₹ 15,65,410/-. 4. The brief facts relevant to the issue are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had revised his return of income and thereby offered less income than that was shown in the original return. On being asked to explain in this respect, the assessee explained as under:- Reply dated 24.10.2016 The perusal of the above comparative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer further observed that as per the earlier policies, the employee and his / her family (in case of employee who died whilst in service) would be eligible for pension, gratuity, medical and other benefits like accommodation and education for children. The new policy , however, took away all the benefits except the gratuity benefits which they used to enjoy when policies 32A, 32B and 32C were in existence In lieu of the same, the assessee was paid a sum of ₹ 46,96,247/- as one time settlement vide letter dated 20 ' March 2013. The assessee treated this amount as commuted pension and 1/3 of the same was claimed as exempt u/s 10(10A)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee continue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not immediately retired from the service and continued with the employment with his employer, yet, the basic intent and purpose of the aforesaid payment to the assessee was that of payment towards commuted pension to the employees. Though, generally the retrial benefits are paid on retirement from service, however, under certain circumstances, employment may be continued subject to payment of retrial benefits. After perusal of the facts of the case, we are of the view, that the aforesaid payment to the assessee was nothing but the payment of retiral benefits towards Commuted Pension. We, therefore, are of the view that the lower authorities were not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 10(10A)(ii) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
