TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1772
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted President's Commission in the rank of second lieutenant into Army with effect from 17.12.1977 and retired from the services after serving the Armed Forces for 22.5 years on 31.05.2000. During the tenure of his service, the petitioner was posted in Uri (Jammu and Kashmir) in the year 1985 where the petitioner sustained serious injuries to his spine due to a fall at Mallangam pass located at 15000 ft. during an operation carried out against the enemy. The petitioner was thereafter hospitalized and downgraded medically to A3 (Permanent) in March, 1987 by the Board of Medical Specialists at 92 Base Hospital at Srinagar. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that due to the medical condition, the petitioner was invalidated from attending all future professional courses and selection grade promotions with effect from March, 1987 and therefore, he opted and was granted premature retirement with effect from 31.05.2000 on completion of terms of engagement. It is also the case of the petitioner that during his service and after his retirement, the return of income for salary/pension were filed within the prescribed time under section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was also pointed out to the petitioner that as the petitioner had not offered the income under the head 'salary' while filing the revised return of income for Assessment Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, the petitioner was not eligible for claiming any refund. 12. The petitioner, therefore, was informed that as the petitioner had taken voluntary retirement, the petitioner would not be eligible for any tax exemption in accordance with Circular No. 13/2019. 13. The petitioner, thereafter, by letter dated 16.12.2019 informed respondent no. 2 that case of the petitioner would fall within the Circular No. 13/2019 as the Board of Army medical authorities and office of the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts have found no improvement in the medical condition of the petitioner and have acknowledged that the petitioner was invalidated and thereby eligible for disability pension. It was contended by the petitioner that the petitioner was getting pension without any deduction of Tax at Source. 14. As the petitioner did not receive any response, the petitioner again by letter dated 21.01.2020 reiterated the request followed by reminder letters dated 20.09.2022, 15.12.2022, 07.02.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n application for claim of refund/loss beyond six years from the end of relevant assessment year and submitted that the Circular No.9/2015 would not be applicable in the facts of the case as the petitioner is entitled to the refund of the tax paid as disability pension received by the petitioner is falling under exempt income and therefore, the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax on such disability pension. 21. In support of his submission, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer reported in (2025) 171 taxmann.com 469 (Delhi) wherein it is held as under: "53. To summarise, sub-section (2) to Section 239 was a provision ascribing a period of limitation for instituting claims for refund. The same came to be omitted with effect from 01 September 2019. This legislative act is demonstrative of the clear legislative intent to avoid prescribing strict limitation periods within which refund applications may be preferred and may be considered as having been validly instituted. This more so in light of the stand of the CBDT itself which in its numerous circulars spoke of tax erroneousl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....payment and/or excess payment of self-assessment tax as per the provisions of the Act." 15. Meaning thereby, there is a power with the Central Board of Direct Taxes to condone the delay. There appears to be no justification in forcing the petitioner to file an application before Central Board of Direct Taxes. Once the power is there and it was not the petitioner, who was at fault in the matter, this Court, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, is of the considered opinion that the delay can be condoned by this Court also, and therefore, the delay in filing the application for refund of tax is hereby condoned. It is not a case where the assessee was sleeping over his right, it is a case where the assessee was fighting with the department for his legitimate right of grant of disability pension, as he was disabled officer and his original application was allowed only on 03.08.2017 and the order was passed by the Ministry of Defence on 17.11.2017 granting him disability pension w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and with quite promptitude he has submitted an application for refund of tax. 16. This Court in the case of Colonel Madan Gopal Singh Negi v/s CIT (II) (W.P. No....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar will not come in way of the petitioner, as the petitioner is not at fault in the matter. The respondent shall also pay the interest in respect of the entire amount right from 2007-08 to 2015-16, as the statute i.e. Income Tax Act, 1961 does not debar an assessee, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, for grant of interest." 23. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Col. Jaswinder Pal Singh v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2023) 152 taxmann.com 103 (Punjab & Haryana) wherein in similar facts, relying up the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of Colonel Ashwani Kumar Ram Singh (supra), the Court allowed the writ petition and the amount of tax paid by the petitioner for the relevant years was ordered to be refunded along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 24. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Jaswinder Pal Singh reported in (2024) 466 ITR 249 dismissing the SLP arising out....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de another Circular No. 211 dated 03.03.2020 (Annexure P-18). 8. Issuance of Circular No. 13/2019 dated 24.06.2019 (Annexure P-15), Supreme Court order dated 30.08.2019 (Annexure P-16), Circular No. 210 dated 20.02.2020 (Annexure P-17) and Circular No. 211 dated 03.03.2020 (Annexure P-18) are not disputed by the respondent in the reply. 9. It is a sad situation to see that ex-army person had to once again approach the authority vide letter dated 08.02.2021 (Annexure P-19) for sanction to file revised returns for the financial year 2009-10 to 2015-16 as the revised returns have been filed within 20 days of the receipt of the amount on implementation of the court's orders whereby he has been granted arrears of disability pension and filing the revised returns was within the time stipulated in CBDT Circular 2009/2015 (Annexure P-20). The petitioner again approached the authority through CPGRAMS portal of Government of India vide grievance dated 22.11.2021 (Annexure P-21) and even this was rejected vide reply received on 27.02.2022 (Annexure P-22). The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 (Annexure P-13) is reproduced as under:- "1. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7/2018 was allowed and the respondents were directed to refund the entire amount of income tax they had recovered, which was the exempted amount and which the petitioner had paid in respect of disability pension. The said judgment has attained finality. 13. The petitioner has further placed on record another judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court passed in W.P. No. 8858/2019 titled as Colonel Ashwani Kumar Ram Singh (Retd.) vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, decided on 29.08.2019 (Annexure P-3) wherein again by referring to the case of the Colonel Madan Gopal Singh Nagi (Annexure P-2), a direction was given to grant refund to the petitioner on the tax paid by him on the disability pension within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order and the respondents were further given direction to pay interest in respect of the entire amount. 14. In the present case as well, no explanation has been given as to why as per the Circular dated 02.07.2001 as referred to in the case of Colonel Madan Gopal Singh Nagi (Annexure P-2), once the disability pension was exempted from income tax then why this benefit has not been given to the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th April, 1986 which is as under:- DISABILITY PENSION CLAIM: EX-NO. 3157896 SEP MAHAVIR SINGH NARWAL. 1. Further to this Headquarters letter of even number dated 03 Apr 86. 2. The disability pension claim in respect of Ex No. 3157896 Sep Mahavir Singh Narwal has been re-examined threadbare by the competent authority. During the course of examination it is seen that the individual was placed in temporary low medical category "CEE" for six months with effect from 21 Sep 78.Having been placed in low medical category he had applied for discharge on compassionate grounds on 19 Feb 79. 3. He was discharged from service on 24 Apr. 79 after completion of all the medical formalities which are applicable in case of disposal of permanent low medical category personnel. 4. It has been opined by the competent authority that his discharge from service cannot be legally termed as of "on compassionate grounds at his own request". But it should be considered as disposal of low medical category personnel because of non availability of suitable sheltered appointment for him. Therefore the cause and clause of his discharge from service requires change to fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra) has considered the Circular dated 09.06.2015, more particularly, para nos. 3 and 6 of the Circular which empowers the CBDT to condone the delay. 28. It appears that the respondent authority without considering the facts of the case has mechanically applied its mind while passing the order under section 119(2)(b) of the Act observing as under: "4. In light of relevant provisions of the Act and CBDT Circular referred supra, facts of assessee's case are examined It is observed that assessee has retired from defence service in May 2000 and was assessed by a medical board to be eligible for disability pension. The final approval letter of disability case was issued by PCDA Authorities in October 2018 However, assessee filed application for condonation of delay u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A. Y 2007-08 to A.Y 2018-19 on 20.09.2022 As per the Para 3 of the above referred circular the period of A.Ys. 2007-08 to 2015-16, falls under category of more than six years after the end of relevant assessment year, the same cannot be entertained in view of circular no. 09/2015 dated 09.06.2015 5. Considering the elaborate facts discussed herein above, c....