TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1812
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act') relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and retired from Punjab National Bank, filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2020-21 on 25-12-2020 declaring total income at Rs. 5,82,970/- and making a claim of leave encashment salary of Rs. 7,65,404/- u/s. 10(10AA)(ii) of the Act. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) and the claim of deduction u/s. 10(10AA)(ii) was restricted to Rs. 3 lakhs. 3. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the addition by observing as follows: "5.2 The major contention of the appellant is he should be allowed full exemption of leave encashment as government has not increased the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as he has already retired in the year 2017. Given the finding of the Apex court in numerous cases that the State undoubtedly enjoys greater latitude in the matter of taxing statute. It may impose a tax on a class of people whereas it may not do so in respect of the other class, the case of discrimination made out by assessee cannot be basis of any relief. Thus, the benefit claimed by the appellant is not available under law as the notification is applicable from 01.04.2023 and appellant has already retired in FY 2019-20. 4.5 In view of the above grounds of appeal and submissions made by the appellant the grounds of appeal of the appellant are hereby dismissed." 4. Aggrieved against the appellate order, the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(5) No care for Board notification No. 31/2023/ F. No. 200/-/2023-ITA-1 dated 24.05.2023 (Effective retrospectively) made where limit for Non-Govt. Employees (others than Central/State) have been raised to Ras. 25,00,000/- (Maximum) u/sec 10(10AA) (ii) of Act: The CIT(A) considering that this notification is not with retrospective effect but w.e.f 01.04.2023 &n since Appellate has already retired in F.Y. 2019-20, hence the claim of assessee for Rs. 7,65,404/- u/sec. 10(10AA) is tenable and has restricted to Rs. 3,00,000/-. ................................ 3. The CBDT's Notification dated 24.05.2023 (No. 31/2023/F.No. 200/3/2023-ITA-1) (copy enclosed Page no. 1) clearly states that "S.O. 2276(E).-In exercise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mstances number of decisions already granted by Jaipur Bench; details as below:- (1) Govind Chatwani, Appeal No. ITA No. 385/JP/2023 dated 31.10.2023 copy as enclosed (Page 2108) (2) Devendra kumar Gupta M.A. No. 49/JP/2023 dated 18.02.2025 copy as enclosed." 6. Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue supported the order passed by the lower authorities and requested to confirm the disallowance. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. This issue of deduction u/s. 10(10AA)(ii) is no more res-integra based on the decisions passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Govind Chhatwani Vs. CIT(Appeals) in ITA No. 385/JP/2023 dated 31-10- 2023 wherein it is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f 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, appears to be justified. This is so because over the decades, the pay-scales admissible to government servants, and even employees of the Public Sector Undertaking and Nationalised Banks and all others have been upwardly revised, keeping in view, the financial growth in the country as well as on account of rising inflation. The last drawn salaries have increased manifold since time and notification issued under Clause (ii) of Section 10(10AA) was lastly issued, as taken note of hereinabove, on 31.05.2002. We therefore, issue notice to the respondents limited to this aspect. ....