TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 1212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om service under Early Retirement Option Scheme 2003. The assessee has received a sum of Rs. 9,48,300/- towards retirement compensation. The assessee claimed relief under Section 89(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on the retirement proceeds received by him. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and, in fact, the Assessing Officer accepted the claim of the assessee under Section 89(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee filed a petition under Section 154 of the Act on 05.02.2008 claiming exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Act, which was omitted to be claimed, while filing the return of income. Since the assessee made a fresh claim in the application made under Section 154 of the Act, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter allowing the claim, he rejected the application filed under Section 264 of the Act. Having found that the appeal is maintainable before him after condoning the delay, the CIT(Appeals) cannot take a technical plea that the same was not raised in the return of income. According to the Ld. counsel, of course, the provisions of Section 154 of the Act can be invoked to rectify the error which is apparent on the face of record. The fact remains that the assessee received retirement benefit and eligible for exemption under Section 89(1) and 10(10C) of the Act is not in dispute, therefore, mere omission to claim exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Act cannot be adversely construed and the assessee cannot be penalized. 4. Referring to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner rejected the appeal filed under Section 264 of the Act. On a query from the Bench - whether the Revenue has challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) for condoning the delay of eight years and the finding of the CIT(Appeals) that the appeal is maintainable even after the rejection of application filed under Section 264 of the Act, the Ld. D.R. has fairly submitted that the Department has not filed any appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Referring to Section 154 of the Act, the Ld. D.R. submitted that Section 154 provides for rectification of error which is apparent on the face of record. The assessee has not made any claim under Section 10(10C) of the Act. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 89(1) of the Act, which was all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) has also found that the appeal of the assessee was maintainable even though the Administrative Commissioner rejected the petition filed against the intimation under Section 154 of the Act. This order of the CIT(Appeals), namely condoning the delay of nearly 8 years and the finding regarding maintainability of appeal, is not challenged by the Revenue either by way of a separate appeal or by way of cross-objection. The only contention of the Revenue before this Tribunal is that the claim of exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Act was not made by the assessee in the return of income, therefore, the assessee cannot make the claim by way of petition. At the best, the assessee can claim by way of a revised ....