TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1832
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....26, 1721/Pun/2026, 1722/Pun/2026, 1723/Pun/2026, 1728/Pun/2026, 1729/Pun/2026, 1730/Pun/2026, 1731/Pun/2026, 1732/Pun/2026, 1733/Pun/2026, 1734/Pun/2026, 1735/Pun/2026, 1751/Pun/2026, 1752/Pun/2026, 1753/Pun/2026, 1754/Pun/2026, 1755/Pun/2026, 1756/Pun/2026 Sanjay Sadashiv Kshirsagar, Dattatraya Raosaheb Bhalerao Versus ITO, Ward -2 Ahmednagar And Nandkumar Digamber Jadhav Versus ITO, Ward -1 And Md. Abdul Razzak Md. Abdul Kareem Versus ITO, Ward -1, Nanden And Devidas Babulal Mahajan, Nilima Jagdish Kulkarni, Chandrakant Bapurao Kulkarni Versus ITO, Ward 2(1), Nashik And Mahiboob Abdul Birajdas, Muneer Ahemed Abbasmiyan Attar Versus ITO, Ward 2(1), Solapur And Snehal Sajit Dhekane, Yashwant Ishwar Chothe, Sandesh Harischandra Khadekar Versus ITO, Ward -1, Ratnagiri, And Sarita Dayanand Bendre, Rajendra Venkatesh Puranik Versus ITO, Ward -3 Sangli And Tanaji Shripati Bisure Versus ITO, Ward 4 Satara And Vilas Dajibarao Patil Versus ITO Hingoli SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri Tanzil Padvekar (Through Virtual) For the Revenue : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia, JCIT ORDER PER BENCH : The captioned a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s dealt with and finding of this Tribunal reads as under : "2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Since common issues have been raised in the above appeals we proceed to adjudicate these appeals by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. All these appeals were heard together with the permission of Ld.AR and Ld. DR. 3. The common issue raised in these bunch of appeals is that whether the amount received from Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) on account of the forced retirement through the BNSL Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019 is in the nature of Retrenchment Compensation and is a Capital receipt not liable to be taxed as per the provisions of section 10(10B) of the Act. 4. Brief facts relating to all the assessee(s) in the instant appeals are that they are employed with BSNL which is under administrative control of Department of Telecommunications, Govt. of India. In order to revive BSNL, the Union Cabinet in its meeting dated 23.10.2019 approved the revival plan of BSNL and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, Mumbai (MTNL) vide Office Memorandum dated 29.10.2019 issued by Department of Telecommunications. As part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taxmann.com 379 (Chandigarh-Trib.) 2. Dayal Singh Vs. ITO - ITA 519/CHD/2024 3. Suresh Pal Chauhan vs. ITO (2023) 154 taxmann.com 529 (Chandigarh-Trib.) 4. Hindustan Photo Film Workers Welfare Centre Vs. Govt. of India (2017) 79 taxmann.com 298 (Madras) 5. CIT (TDS) Vs. Hindustan Photo Film Workers Welfare Centre (2021 129 taxmann.com 356 (Madras) 6. Union of India Vs. M/s. Hindustan Photo Film Workers Welfare Centre and others _ Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.37247/2017 7. Shree Rajeshwar Sharma Vs. ITO - ITA No.870/CHD/2018 8. CIT Vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd.(1967) 66 ITR 710 (SC) 9. PCIT Vs. Karnataka State Cooperative Federation Ltd. (2021) 128 taxmann.com 1 (Karnataka) 10. CIT Vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (2012) 23 taxmann.com 23 (Bombay) 7. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that firstly the assessee(s) have not made this claim in the regular returns of income and themselves paid due taxes and such claim ought to have been made through revised return. He also submitted that the sum received from BSNL is on account of Voluntary ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any compensation received by a workman in accordance with any scheme which the Central Government may, having regard to the need for extending special protection to the workmen in the undertaking to which such scheme applies and other relevant circum- stances, approve in this behalf.] Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause- (a) compensation received by a workman at the time of the closing down of the undertaking in which he is employed shall be deemed to be compensation received at the time of his retrenchment; (b) compensation received by a workman, at the time of the transfer (whether by agreement or by operation of law) of the ownership or management of the undertaking in which he is employed from the employer in relation to that undertaking to a new employer, shall be deemed to be compensation received at the time of his re-trenchment if- (i) the service of the workman has been interrupted by such transfer; or (ii) the terms and conditions of service applicable to the workman after such transfer are in any way less favourable to the workman than those applicable to him immediately before the transfer; or (iii) the new employer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the employee's "Option." In retrenchment, the employer triggers the exit unilaterally. The law says "A is not B." The Tribunals' interpretation is that "A is B" because the employer was in financial distress. In BSNL VRS-2019, the employee exercised a "Voluntary Option" on a portal. This mutuality removes the stigma of retrenchment. 8. We are of the considered opinion that Ld. CIT(A) should have condoned the delay as assessee had filed elaborate explanation regarding delay and there was sufficient cause for delay. These Assessees have filed Returns of Income based on professional Advice received at that point of time. However, subsequently they made revised claim before CIT(A). 8.1 Substantial justice is more important than the procedural delay. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs DCIT [2017] 398 ITR 250 (Bombay) has condoned the delay of 2984days, which was on account of professional advice of a CA. 9. Pune The identical issue of BSNL employees is decided by ITAT in favour of assessee in ITA Nos. 290 and 293/PUN/2026,ITA Nos.294 and 295/PUN/2026. ITAT Pune has relied on the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "...In the present case, the delay in filing of the appeal is almost four years which is an inordinate and huge delay. Moreover, as has been elaborately discussed above, the appellant has also failed to provide any reasonable ground that could assist the first appellate authority to draw sufficient cause for the inordinate delay of 1,396 days in filing of this appeal. The inordinate delay in the present case, if condoned, would make the term ''Sufficient cause" in section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 hollow and meaningless. 20. In light of the facts of the case, provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and judicial decisions in the matter as discussed above, I am constrained to conclude that the appellant has failed to submit any reasonable ground for condoning the inordinate delay of 1,396 days i.e almost four years in filing this appeal. Being bereft of any sufficient cause as envisaged in section 249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone throu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the Grounds of appeal raised by respective assessee(s) stands allowed." 9.1 Since the facts in the instant bunch of appeals are same, therefore, following the same parity of reasoning, I hold that the alleged sum received under BSNL Voluntary Retirement2019 Scheme is in the nature of Retrenchment Compensation received by the assessee(s) in appeal and such compensation falls under the provisions of section 10(10B) of the Act and not u/s.10(10C) of the Act and is in the nature of Capital receipt exempt from tax. Assessee(s) are directed to place revised computation of income before the respective Jurisdictional Assessing Officers claiming the exemption u/s.10(10B) of the Act of the alleged sum and thereafter the Revenue authorities shall compute the tax liability and grant the refund (if any) entitled to the assessee(s) after due verification of such revised computation of income. Impugned findings of ld. CIT(A) are set aside and the common issue raised in the Grounds of appeal by respective assessee(s) stands allowed." Unquote. 10. Before us the Ld.AR also filed copies of the Orders of CIT(A) who have condoned the delay in identical facts and allowed the appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orm but the substance that matters so far definition of retrenchment compensation is concerned. Right now we are dealing with an employee who is giving up his source of livelihood under the threat of dislocation, and the hyper technical interpretations based on technicalities about the wordings in the settlement deed, signed by him under these compelling circumstances, is being taken as the understanding about assessee's actual conduct; that is too pedantic an approach and it cannot meet our approval. Let us also not forget that while taking calls on these issues, which deal with employees in the lower rung of hierarchy, we must not be too pedantic or hyper technical in approach. We have to be pragmatic in approach and we must give full effect to the true intent of the public welfare provisions. To us, the arrangement in question is nothing but a termination of employment with the offer of compensation. Viewed thus, the payment in question cannot be anything but retrenchment compensation. 10. In our considered view, the conditions of section 10(10B), so far as eligibility for exemption is concerned, is satisfied. That, however, is not the end of the matter". 1....