COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. A PALANIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TAX Case filed under Section 260 A of the Income TAX Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TAX Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 10.08.2007 passed in ITA.No,2433/Mds/2006. By framing the following questions of law 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is eligible for the benefit of Section 10(10C) without even going to the details of the Early Retirement Option Scheme to see if it fulfils the criteria laid down for Voluntary Retirement Schemes?

(2.) WHETHER on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 10(10C) when the scheme under which the amount was paid does not fulfil the criteria prescribed u/r 2BA of the Income Tax rules? the revenue on appeal before this Court under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 10.08.2007 passed in ITA.No,2433/Mds/2006 in respect of the assessment year 2004-05. 2. The assessee was an employee of the Reserve Bank of India, who availed the scheme called Optional Early Retirement Scheme. He claimed exemption u/s 10(10C) of Rs.5 lakhs out of the compensation received under the above Scheme. On a perusal of the Form No.16 submitted by the assessee along with the return, it was found that the Reserve Bank of India has not granted exemption u/s 10(10C) on the compensation received under OERS, but it has duly deducted tax, treating this compensation as fully taxable and remitted to the Government account. Further, it was found that the assessee has made a claim u/s 10(10C) independently outside Form 16, in the computation sheet attached to the return and claimed a refund.

(3.) WE have heard the argument of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.