TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1828
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2021-12. At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. The FAA held that there was a delay of 1592 days / 1455 days in filing the appeals before him and that no reasonable cause had been shown for condoning the same. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen and a retrenched employee of BSNL. It was submitted that the delay in filing the appeals occurred due to lack of awareness regarding the correct legal position concerning exemption available u/s. 10(10B) and 10(10AA) of the Act. The assessee became aware of the availability of exemption u/s.10(10B) of the Act only after the order pas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nded that the delay occurred due to bona fide reasons and not on account of any deliberate inaction or negligence. Accordingly, the Ld.AR prayed that the delay in filing the appeals before the FAA may be condoned and the matters may be restored for adjudication on merits. 5. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the FAA. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The FAA had dismissed the appeals in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits by refusing to condone the delay of 1592 days / 1455 days in filing the appeals before him. We find merit in the explanation offered by the assessee for the belated filing of the appeals. The assessee is a senior citizen and a retrenched employee of BSN....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... year 2020-21 & 2021-22 and offered the balance ex-gratia amount of Rs.8,56,955/- and Rs.29,78,313/- to tax in assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22 respectively. The returns of income filed by the assessee were processed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) u/s.143(1) of the Act and the balance ex-gratia compensation was brought to tax. Subsequently, the assessee became aware of various judicial precedents wherein it was held that the ex-gratia compensation received under the BSNL VRS scheme is fully exempt u/s.10(10B) of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeals before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) with delay of 1592 days / 1455 days. The FAA dismissed the appeals in limine without condoning the delay. 8. Aggrieved....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted that identical issue had been considered by the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Harish Kumar vs. ITO in ITA No.42/CHD/2025 dated 30.05.2025, wherein it was held that compensation received under BSNL VRS 2019 is eligible for exemption u/s.10(10B) of the Act. The Ld.AR also brought to our notice that various appellate authorities across the country have accepted identical claims and granted exemption u/s.10(10B) of the Act in respect of the entire ex-gratia compensation received under the BSNL VRS Scheme, including orders passed by the ADDL/JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai in the case of Sri Kanayi Sugunan dated 30.03.2026, ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore in the case of Sri Gurbachan Singh dated 13.02.2026, ADDL/JCIT(A) 10, Mumbai in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e BSNL VRS-2019 scheme was formulated pursuant to the revival package approved by the Government of India and the Union Cabinet on 23.10.2019. It is further borne out from the records that the compensation payable under the scheme was funded through Government budgetary support. During the course of hearing, the assessee present submitted that though the nomenclature is mentioned as VRS, it is in effect a retrenchment scheme, since BSNL could not pay salary to employees just before rolling out the scheme. Therefore, the scheme partakes the character of a Government-approved retrenchment compensation scheme and cannot be treated as an ordinary voluntary retirement scheme simpliciter. 12. We further find that identical issue had come up fo....