AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 261
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. "That the order passed by LD CIT (A) is unwarranted illegal & Bad in Law. 2. That LD CIT (A) erred in not considering the ground of appeal regarding mentioning of wrong date in the order. 3. That LD CIT (A) erred in not considering the fact that the revised return was furnished by the assessee. 4. That LD CIT(A) erred in not allowing the full deduction u/s 10(10AA)(i) of Rs 12,32,184 regarding Leave Encashment. 5. That LD CIT (A) erred in not considering the fact that MP Government promised in section 133 of electricity act 2003 that such terms and conditions on the transfer shall not in any way be less favourable than those which would have been applicable to them if there had been no such transfer u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice tenure i.e up to 09-04-2012 the appellant was Government employee and only during last 4 years of his service he served as the employee of a Government Company. 11. That Ld.CIT(A) erred in not allowing the prorate deduction u/s 10(10AA)(i) up to 09.04.2012 up to when the appellant was State Government employee." 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that during the year under consideration, the assessee superannuated from undertaking of Madhya Pradesh Government i.e. Madhya Pradesh Power Management Co.Ltd. and received Leave encashment of Rs. Rs. 12,32,184/- . The assessee filed its return of income through emode on 10.06.2016, declaring income of Rs. 25,55,890/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1)of the Income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 10(10AA(ii)) of the Income Tax, 1961 amounting upto only Rs. 300000/- and same has been allowed during processing of return u/s 143(1)." 3. On further appeal, Ld.CIT(A) without deciding the issue on merit, rejected the claim at threshold holding that the assessee could not make a fresh claim otherwise than by way of a revised return of income and not under the rectification application. 4. We have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the material available on record. We find that as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra), the appellate authorities can entertain any fresh claim filed by the assessee during appellate proceedings and therefore, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ineer with Indian Post and Telegraph Department, Govt. of India w.e.f. 24.04.1980 and thereafter, in permanent capacity as Junior Engineer in the Department of Telecommunications, Govt. of India w.e.f 22.03.1983 vide order dated 22.06.1986. Subsequently, with effect from 01.10.2000 vide order dated 19.01.2004 issued by Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communication and IT, Govt. of India, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 37A of CCS(Pension) Rules, permanently absorbed in the Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) a PSU undertaking of Govt. of India. I am of the view that the assessee had been in service under the Department of Telecommunication, Govt. of India and his stamps of appointment and pay-scale were governed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunal as discussed above has been set aside/stayed or overruled by the Higher Judicial Authorities. Before me, no material was placed on record to point out any distinguishing feature in the facts of the case of the assessee and case mentioned above. Thus, respectfully following the order the Mumbai Tribunal as mentioned/discussed above, I hereby directed the AO to allow 100% exemption of leave encashment received on account of employment with Department of telecommunication i.e. Rs. 6,85,115/- under the provision of section 10(10AA)(1) of the Act whereas for remaining amount the AO is directed to calculate the exemption as per the provision of section 10(10AA)(ii) of the Act. Thus, the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby par....