TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the issues involved in both the appeals are common and arise from the same factual matrix identical, both the appeal were heard together and are therefore, being disposed off by way of a common order. ITA No.660/AHD/2026 2. We would first take up ITA No.660/AHD/2026 pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-2021 preferred by the Assessee against the Order, dated 19/02/2026, passed by CIT(A) whereby the Learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal against the Intimation Order, dated 26/11/2021, passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']as barred by limitation. 3. The grounds raised by the Assessee read as under: "1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law in holding that the claim of exe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lanation is bona fide. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the Appellant is making a new claim, ignoring that appellate authorities have plenary powers to grant all legitimate reliefs, even if not claimed in the return, as mandated by CBDT Circular No. 14 of 1955 and upheld by various judicial precedents including decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court and High Courts. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal at the threshold without appreciating that the Appellants case is factually identical to Harish Kumar vs. ITO. (ITA No. 42/CHD/2025), where compensation received under the same BSNL VRS-2019 was held fully exempt under Section 10(10B). The Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the merits despite the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the return of income and on account of the fact that the employer deducted tax at source from the said compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019, the Assessee inadvertently offered the same to tax in the return of income for the Assessment Year 2020-2021 which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on the decision of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Harish Kumar vs. ITO Ward 5(5), Chandigarh (ITA No. 42/CHD/2025 dated 30/05/2025), wherein compensation under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme was held to be exempt under Section 10(10B), the Assessee filed appeal before the Learned CIT(A) raising additional claim of exemption under Section 10(10B) of the Act in respect of the compensation received. It ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Tribunal either on facts or in law. Further, the view taken by the Tribunal finds support in the (a) judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Ors. vs. Katiji and Ors.(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) - on the issue of condonation of delay; and (b) Circular No. 14 of 1955 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes directing officers not to take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to their rights and assist them in claiming and securing reliefs/refunds. On the other hand, the reliance placed by the Learned CIT(A) on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd V CIT: 284 ITR 323 is clearly misplaced as the Learned CIT(A) could entertain a fresh claim raised by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lable to the Assessee as the same would have no application to the relevant assessment year. Accordingly, the additional ground raised by the Assessee is dismissed. Our view draws support from the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Madan Lal Grover Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2) (1), Ahmedabad: ITA No. 2204/AHD/2025 (Dated 10/04/2026, Assessment Year 2020-21) and Govardhan Deepchand Bhambhani vs ITO:ITA No. 289/AHD/2025 (Dated 28/07/2025, AY 2020-21). Thus, Additional Ground raised by the Assessee is dismissed. Thus, Ground No. 6 raised by the Assessee is dismissed. 10. In result the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is partly allowed. ITA No.661/AHD/2026 11. We would next take up ITA No.661/AHD....