PCIT revision upheld after assessee wrongly claimed exemptions under sections 10(10CC) and 10(10BB) for annuity payments

ITAT Ahmedabad upheld PCIT's revision u/s 263 finding AO's order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. Assessee wrongly claimed exemptions u/s 10(10CC) and 10(10BB) for annuity payments made to LIC from VRS amount. AO failed to conduct proper inquiry with employer who confirmed no perquisite was paid nor any disallowance made u/s 40(a)(v). Following SC precedent in Navnit Lal Sakar Lal, annuity amount constituted salary income taxable in assessee's hands. Appeals dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of invoking provisions u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Examination of the Assessing Officer's (A.O.) order for being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
3. Examination of specific exemptions claimed by the assessees.

Summary:

1. Validity of invoking provisions u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) initiated proceedings u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after examining the case records and finding the A.O.'s order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The PCIT found that certain exemptions were wrongly allowed, contrary to the provisions of law, in respect of salary income. The PCIT issued an order u/s 263 dated 29.03.2023, setting aside the assessment to the file of the A.O. for fresh consideration.

2. Examination of the Assessing Officer's (A.O.) order for being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue:
The A.O. had accepted the returned income without proper verification of the exemptions claimed by the assessees. The PCIT observed that the A.O. allowed exemptions based on the assessee's submissions without proper inquiry or verification. The A.O.'s order was found to be erroneous as it allowed deductions more than the VRS benefits received, and the exemptions were not recorded or allowed by the employer in Form 16. The PCIT's inquiry revealed that the annuity amount paid to LIC was on the request of the employees and was part of their taxable income.

3. Examination of specific exemptions claimed by the assessees:
The exemptions in question included:
- Rs. 15,00,000/- paid by the employer to LIC for purchasing an annuity policy.
- Rs. 4,50,000/- claimed u/s 10(10CC) of the Act.
- Rs. 4,51,900/- claimed as retrenchment compensation u/s 10(10B) of the Act.

The A.O. did not verify the claims with the employer and accepted the assessee's explanations without further inquiry. The PCIT's inquiry with the employer confirmed that the annuity payment was part of the VRS amount and taxable as salary. The exemptions claimed u/s 10(10CC) and u/s 10(10B) were found to be incorrect.

Conclusion:
The ITAT upheld the PCIT's order u/s 263, stating that the A.O.'s order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue due to the lack of proper inquiry and verification. The appeals filed by the assessees were dismissed, and the revisionary orders passed by the PCIT were upheld.

Result:
The appeals filed by all nine assessees were dismissed.

---