2026 (10) TMI 1832

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Noida (hereinafter referred to as "Ld. CIT(A)"), dated 15.06.2026 and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Gurugram (hereinafter referred to as "Ld. CIT(A)"), both dated 27.07.2026 and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A)-4, Hyderabad dated 14.07.2026 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21 in case of Hetal Chaitanya Jani (L/h. of Lt. Chaitanya VasudevJani) and A.Y. 2021-22 in case of Raysinh Atabhai Vala, Hetal Chaitanya Jani (L/h. of Lt. Chaitanya Vasudev Jani) and Radheshyam Ramashankar Chaubey. Since, the facts and issues involved in all th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 15.07.2026 favouring the exemption." 4. We have heard both the sides and have perused the material available on record. 5. The Assessee in the present case is an individual. During the relevant previous year, the Assessee received compensation under Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2019 [for short 'BSNL VRS-2019']. Under the mistaken belief that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS- 2019 was taxable, at the time of filing the return of income the Assessee did not claim exemption under Section 10(10B) of the Act, in respect of the compensation of Rs. 3,16,797/- in the income tax return for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. The return was processed by CPC, Bengaluru, and later the impugned order of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsidered the intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Act; and directed the Assessing Officer to grant refund to the Assessee holding that the compensation received by the assessee under BSNL VRS -2019 was exempt under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The aforesaid decision of the Tribunal was followed, inter alia, in the case of Kirtida Rajeshkumar Shah Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), Ahmedabad : ITA Nos.151/AHD/2026 (Assessment Years: 2020-21) and Chhaganlal Bhimabhai Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Bhavnagar: ITA Nos. 2547 & 2548/AHD/2025 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22). 7. There is no change in the legal proposition and the factual matrix. Revenue has failed to distinguish the above decisions of the Tribunal ei....