9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 991X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and retired salaried person. For the Asst. Year 2020-21, assessee filed his Return of Income on 26/12/2020 declaring total income of Rs. 44, 05, 230/-. The assessee claimed an amount of Rs. 15, 93, 539/- as exempt income u/s. 10(10AA) being earned leave encashment on retirement. However the CPC restricted the claim to Rs. 3, 00, 000/- and added remaining amount of Rs. 12, 93, 540/- by passing intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act and demanded tax thereon. The assessee paid the tax demand and challenged the order by way of appeal. 3. The assessee relied upon notification no 31 of 2023 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (ii) of clause (10AA) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government, having regard to the maximum amount receivable by its employees as cash equivalent of leave salary in respect of the period of earned leave at their credit at the time of their retirement, whether superannuation or otherwise, hereby specifies the amount of Rs. 3, 00, 000 (rupees three lakhs only) as the limit in relation to employees mentioned in that sub-clause who retire, whether on superannuation or otherwise, after the 1st day of April, 1998. [Notification No. 123/2002/F, No. 200/23/98-ITA-I) Further, through the notification no 31 of 2023, the above limit had been revised to Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Addl JCIT (A) grossly erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the preliminary issue raised regarding the violation of statutory provision of Sec 143(1)(a) of the Income tax Act 1961 the Act in the form of non consideration of adjournment application filed with reference to the notice u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act before making the adjustment of RS 1293540 2 The order of the Ld. AO passed us 143(1) of the Act is without jurisdiction and authority of law. 3 The Ld Addl JCIT (A) grossly erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the ground regarding non speaking order of the Ld. AO passed us 143 1 4 The Ld. Addl JCIT (A) has grossly erred in law and is not justified in confirmin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Entitlement of Leave Encashment (Rs.) 1 08/06/1988 9180 08 9180x8=73440 2 08/06/1988 9450 08 9450x8=75600 3 08/06/1988 9720 08 9720x8=77760 4 08/06/1988 9990 08 9990x8=79920 5 26/03/1996 16290 08 16290x8=130320 6 26/03/1996 16920 08 16920x8=135360 7 27/11/1998 30000 08 30000x8=240000 8 31/05/2002 30000 10 30000x10=300000 9 24/05/2023 2, 50, 000 (approx.) 10 250000x10=2500000 6.1. Further the assessee relied upon various case laws. 7. Per contra the Ld. D.R. appearing for the Revenue supported the order passed by the Lower Authorities and requested to uphold the same. 8. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. It is undisputed fact that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the benefit should be given to the assessee. The similar issue has been decided by the bench in the case of Ram Charan Gupta in ITA No. 408/JP/2022 wherein the bench has already held as under:- "8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. The bench noted that the assessee relying the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the Union of India in the case of Kamal Kumar Kalia & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors in WP(C) 11846/2019 dated 08.11.2019 wherein the court has given following directions :- "8. We are however of the, prima facie, view that the grievances of the petitioner with regard to exemption limit under Clause (ii) of Section 10 (10AA) not being raised since 1998, appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
