Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Palanisamy Deivanayaghi, Erode vs Ito, Ward 2(1), Erode on 27 September, 2024
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, 'डी' ायपीठ, चे ई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'D' BENCH: CHENNAI
ी यस यस िव ने रिव, ाियक सद एवं ी जगदीश, लेखासद के सम(
BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं ./ITA No.2026/Chny/2024
िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2022-23
Palanisamy Deivanayaghi, The Asst. Commissioner of
33-A, Shiva Complex, Athani Road, Vs. Income Tax,
Sathyamangalam Taluk, Circle-1,
Erode-638 401. Erode.
[PAN: AIKPD 8951B]
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent)
अपीलाथE की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri S. Senthil Kumar, Advocate for
GHथE की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Saujanya Ranjan, JCIT
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.09.2024
घोषणाकी तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2024
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M :
Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter "CIT(A)"] dated 04.07.2024.
2. The only effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against confirming the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") issued by CPC, Bengaluru rejecting the ITA No.2026/Chny/2024 :- 2 -:
relief u/s. 89(1) on the ground that Form-10E was not uploaded before processing of the return.
3. The assessee is an employee with LIC of India and has drawn arrear salary of Rs. 9,54,666/-. The assessee has claimed relief u/s. 89(1) of the Act on the arrear salary. However, the CPC, Bengaluru while processing the return of income has not allowed the relief u/s. 89(1) of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the intimation order as the assessee has not submitted Form-10E before the processing date and the Form-10E was uploaded online on 01.06.2024 after date of processing.
4. The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that Rule 21AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, only provides that Form-10E is to be submitted to the employer and does not state that it should be filled along with the return . The Ld. AR has submitted that assessee has filled the form and the employer has deducted TDS allowing the relief . The Ld AR submitted that in any case now the Form 10E has been uploaded , therefore in view decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench in ITA No.268/Ind/2023 , Ld CIT(A) should have allowed the relief.
ITA No.2026/Chny/2024
:- 3 -:
5. The Ld. Departmental Representative has supported the orders passed by the lower authorities.
6. We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. We agree with the submission made by the Ld. AR. On similar facts, the ITAT, Indore Bench in No.268/Ind/2023 in the case of Yashwant Singh Pawar , vide order dated 21.12.2023 held that the assessee is a employee and there is no malafide intention or admitted negligence on the part of the assessee of the filing form in time and therefore directed that the assessee should be given the benefit of relief as per Form-10E subsequently filed. Hence, we remand the matter back to the file of A.O and the A.O shall verify the Form-10E filed by the assessee and allow the eligible relief. With these directions, the assessee's appeal is allowed.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on 27th September, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(यस यस िव ने रिव) (जगदीश)
(SS Viswanethra Ravi) (Jagadish)
याियक सद य / Judicial Member लेखा सद य /Accountant Member
चे ई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 27th September, 2024. EDN/-
ITA No.2026/Chny/2024
:- 4 -:
आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant
2. थ /Respondent
3. आयकर आयु /CIT, Chennai
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR
5. गाड फाईल/GF