Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Uttara Ghosh, Kolkata vs Assessee on 2 August, 2012
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 1 of 17
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
KOLKATA 'B' BENCH, KOLKATA
Before Shri Pramod Kumar (Accountant Member),
and Shri Mahavir Singh (Judicial Member)
I. T.A. No.: 140 7/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Uttara Ghosh,
C/o. Mr. Moni Gupta,
22B, Manda ville G ardens,
Fla t-8A, Kolkata-70 0 019 ............................................App ellant
[PAN : ADVPG 3 191 N]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 134 6/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Suni t Kuma r D ey,
33, Nilmo ni Sh on e Street,
Bhadrakali, Bh atpara, Hooghly -712 232 ................................App ell an t
[PAN : ADN PD 9340 C]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 134 7/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Varsha Chow dhu ry,,
164/C/50 , Prri nce Anwar Shah Road , 2 n d f loor,,
Lake Gard ens, Kolk ata -7 00 04 5 ............................................Appellan t
[PAN : ABWPC 0215 C]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 134 8/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 2 of 17
Sri Ra bind r Na th Mi shra,,
67A, G.T. Road (N), Salkia, Howrah-711 106 .......................A pp ellan t
[PAN : AWEPM 9656 G]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 134 9/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Geeta Jon es,
20C, Pa ramhan sa D eb R oad, Kolkata-700 027 .......................Appellan t
[PAN : ACEPJ 29 43 F]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 0/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ree Kant Rai,,
C/o. Arvin d K uma r Singh,
67/26, Strand Road , Kolkata-700 0062 ................................Appellan t
[PAN : AC IPR 0 769 F]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 1/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Parva thy Chandran,
Fla t 3C, Premay an Building,
63A, Charu Chandra Place ( West),
Kolka ta-700 033................................................................. Appella nt
[PAN : ACTPC 3727 H]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 2/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Jag dish Ram,
Fla t No. 3 00E, 3 r d floor,
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 3 of 17
26, Makarsah a R oad, Kadam tala,
How rah -7 11 10 4 ....................................................................App ell an t
[PAN : AFQPR 94 96 C]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 3/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Soma Pal,
9A/3, Rishi Ba nkim Ch. Road ,
Dum Dum, Kolkata -700 028 ..............................................Appella nt
[PAN : AEJPP 9080 N]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 4/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Shanka r Na th Battacharya,
466(223) Sa san ka Sekha r Bose Sarani,
Baidy abati, Hooghly-712 222 .............................................App ellan t
[PAN : AELPB 3639 M]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 5/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Ashok Kumar Ghosal,
72, Nim ta Nid hkul Road,
Kolka ta-700 049..................................................................Appell ant
[PAN : ADXPG 0209 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 6/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Ashok Kumar Ray,
55/A/14, M.J. R oad, Shrirampur-712 249................................Appellant
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 4 of 17
[PAN : AC IPR 0 848 M]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 7/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Arpi ta Ghosh ,
Pukurtala Sarvo day Park, D uilla,
Mourig ram, howrah-711 302 ................................................App ella nt
[PAN : AEBPG 35 55 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 8/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Achinta Kumar Ghosh,
Pakurtala Sarvo day Park,
Dully Bag ani Pa ra, How rah-7 11 30 2................... .............Ap pellant
[PAN : AC WPG 2827 M]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 135 9/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Biswanath S ur,
Barasa t Da sabhuja tala,
P.O. Chand annaga r, Hoog hly -712 136 ................................Ap pellan t
[PAN : AISPSS 5703 J]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 0/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Mah eshwa r Raul,,
Chingudepu r, P.O. Nalanga,
V-a -Barikpu r Baza r,
Di st.Bhad rak, O ri ssa-7 56 11 2 ......................................................Appell an t
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 5 of 17
[PAN : ADCPR 353 2 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 1/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Suji t Kuma r Bha ttachary ya,
9/1/1, Kali Banerjee Lan e, Howrah -711 1 10................................Appell an t
[PAN : ACXPB 7299 P]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 2/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Shyam N arayan Upadhy ay,
20, Shiv Kris hna Da w Lan e,
Kolka ta-700 054..................................................................Appell ant
[PAN : AA FPU 46 68 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 3/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Malay Ray,
106/3, Bhahmo Samaj Road, Kolkata-700 034 .......................A pp ellant
[PAN : AC IPR 0 853 J]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 4/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Rita Majumder,
Fla t No. A-2, 2 n d flo or,
P-1/17, Ba nerjee Pa ra Ro ad, Kol kata-41 ................................App ell an t
[PAN : ADMPM 8648 M]
-Vs.-
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 6 of 17
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 5/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Ash ok Kumar Das,
Baidy a Pa ra (W), Ba idyabati, Hoo ghly-712 222 ......................App ella nt
[PAN : AC MPD 9 980 A]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 6/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Shyam Na rayan Sing h Yadav,
66/D/5, Prbha s Nagar,
Se rampore -712 249 .............................................................A ppellan t
[PAN : AAIPY 6866 E]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 7/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Ranajit Chatterjee,
RD-6 /2, Raghunathpur, K olkata-700 059 .............................Appellan t
[PAN : ABWPC 0227 G]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 136 8/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Shila Dutta (L/H. Sunil Dutta) ,
Lalbagan, Bel tala, P.O. Cha ndannag ar,
Hoog hly-712 136.................................................... .............Appellant
[PAN : KGU PD 9439 N]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 7 of 17
I. T.A. No.: 136 9/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Para s Na th Pa nd ey,
18 Bhai rab Dutta Lane , 2 n d flo or,
Nandibagan, Salki a, How ra h............................................Ap pella nt
[PAN : AEJPP 9085 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 0/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Ta rak eshwa r R ai,
44, P.K. Ba nerjee Ro ad,
How rah( Sou th)-711 101........................................................ Appellant
[PAN : ADH PR 9482 R]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 1/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. K eya Muk herjee,
77, Li brary Ro ad,
Bhadresw ar, Hoo ghl y-7 12 124 ...............................................App ell an t
[PAN : AEZPM 3 905 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 2/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Deba brata Cha tterj ee,
West Pansil, Sa dhur More, P.O. Pan sila,
Sodep ur, 24-Parg anas(N)-700 112 .......................................App ella nt
[PAN : ABWPC 0221 A]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 3/ Kol. / 2 011
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 8 of 17
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Babl u R oy,
17, Gho shpara La ne,
P.O. Bhadrakali,
Hoog hly-712 232....................................................... .............Appell ant
[PAN : AC IPR 0 764 J]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 4/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Ta rak eshwa r Pandey,
11, Sa ntanu Mi stry Lane, 3 r d floo r,
Salkia, H owrah-711 106 ...................................................Ap pella nt
[PAN : AF MPP 1960 M]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 5/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Su bra ta Bane rj ee,
Radha Apa rtment, 1 s t floor, Flat-A-2,
14/2, Mid dle R oad, K olka ta-700 075................................Ap pellant
[PAN : AEF PB 0744 R]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 6/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Prad eep Kuma r C howdhury,
AG-12 , Sector-2, Sal t Lake Ci ty,
Kolka ta-700 091................................................................. Appella nt
[PAN : AC NPC 4573 H]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 9 of 17
I. T.A. No.: 137 7/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Ha ri Shan kar Pan dey,
306, Subha s Naga r H ousing Compl ex,
Prava sh Nagar, Rishra-712 249 ............................................App ella nt
[PAN : AFSPP 9949 Q]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 8/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Ruma R ay,
60A, Ashok Aven ue, Kolkata -700 040 ................................Appellan t
[PAN : ADKPR 5 602 G]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 137 9/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Pan chana n Mukh erj ee,
66, Ram Si ta Gh at S treet,
PO Bhadra kali,
Hoog hly-712 232.................................................... .............Appellant
[PAN : AEWPM 9782 P]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 138 0/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Shilpi Bhattacharjee,
69, Chandi Gh osh Ro ad,
Kolka ta-700 040............................ ................................Ap pellant
[PAN : ACXPB 7274 N]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 138 1/ Kol. / 2 011
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 10 of 17
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sh ri Ganesh Chandra To sh,
Lalbagan, Bara Pukur Dhar,
Chand ann agar, Hoog hly-712 1 36.........................................Appellant
[PAN : ABRPT 498 1 D]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 138 2/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Sri Pari to sh Nan,
3, Barabazar Old Post Offi ce Street,
Chand ann agar, Hoog hly-712 1 36....................................Ap pellant
[PAN : ABFPN 252 3 D]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 138 3/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Su rendra Na th Pand ey,
18, Bhairab Dutta Lan e, Nandibagan ,
Salkia, H owrah................................................... .............Appellant
[PAN : AEJPP 9077 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
&
I. T.A. No.: 155 9/ Kol. / 2 011
Assessme nt year : 20 04-05
Smt. Pushpi ta Biswa s,
301, Prin ce Anwar Shah Road,
Kolka ta-700 045...............................................................Appellant
[PAN : ACXPB 7283 K]
-Vs.-
Deputy Commi ssione r of Income Tax,
Circl e-22, Kolkata.................................................... .........Respondent
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11
A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5
Page 11 of 17
Appearances by:
B.K. Ghosh and P. Dey, for the appellant
A.P. Roy, for the respondent
Date of co ncluding t he hea ri ng : Mar ch 2 8, 2012
Date of prono unci ng the o rde r : Ma rch , 20 12
O R D E R
Per Bench:
1. The issues involved in all these ap peals are common and, as learned representatives agree, whatever we decide in one appeal will be equally applicable in all other cases. The material facts of all the cases, barring difference in amounts etc. are also similar. We, therefore, take up all these appeals together. We will take up ITA No. 1407/Kol./2011 for A.Y. 2004-05 as the lead case and the decision in the same will be applicable for all other appeals as well.
2. By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged correctness of learned C ommissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)'s order dated 12 t h Au gust, 2011 in the matter of order under section 154 w.r.s.
143(3) for the assessment year 2004-05 on the following grounds :-
(1) That on facts as well as on law, the order passe d by the ld. CIT(A) is perverse, biased, arbitrary and liable to the quashed.
(2) That, on facts as well as on law, the ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that non-consideration of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court on identical issue gives rise to a mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of the provisions of section 154.
I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 12 of 17 (3) That, on facts as well as on law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the issue rais ed by the appellant is debatable and outside the scope of the provisions of section 154. (4) That on facts as well as on law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the ld. Assessing Officer in denying exemption of Rs.5,00,000/- under se ction 10(10C) in respect of the amount received by the a ppellant under the VRS scheme of HSBC Bank, the employer, alleging that the said scheme is not in accordance with the req uirement as prescribed in R ule 2BA of the Income Tax Rules and in total disregard of the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court and the Jurisdictional Appellate Tribunal on the identical issue.
3. The issue in appeal lies in a very narrow compass of material facts. The assessee before us is a former employee of Hongkong and Sanghai Banking Corporation Limited, Kolkata (in short HSBC). In the relevant previous year, she received an amount of Rs.25,42,729/- from HSBC under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme. She accordingly claimed a deduction of Rs.5,00,000/- under section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer declined the said claim on the ground that "the assessee has received VRS benefit excee ding this amount (maximum amount permissible under Rule 2BA), she is not entitled to deduction under section 10(10C )". Subsequently, on 09.03.2010, the assessee moved a rectification petition under section 154 of the Act and requested the assessee to grant deduction under section 10(10C) for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. This claim of the assessee was said to be supported by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's ju dgment in the case of SAIL DSP V.R. Employees' Association, 1998 -vs.- Union of India (262 ITR 638). Even thou gh the said judgment was passed on 12.02.2003, it appears somehow the judgment escaped the attention of I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 13 of 17 the assessee as also the Assessing Officer. In substance, the prayer of the assessee was that, in conformity with the correct legal position and as held by the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of SAIL DSP V.R. Employees' Association, 1998 (supra), the deduction under section 10(10C) for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- be allowed. The Assessing Officer declined the aforesaid requ est for rectification on the short ground that "the purview of section 154 is restricted to the issues, which are not considered and decided in the order s passe d by the Assessing Officer", and "thus the rectification petition filed by the assessee on the issues already decided by the A.O. in his order u/s. 143(3) is outside the scope of section 154 of the I.T. Act". Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), but without any success.
4. Learned CIT(Appeals) was of the view that since the amount received by the assessee on her voluntary retirement from HSBC was in excess of the maximum amount permissible under Rule 2BA, she is not entitled to deduction under section 10(10C). He accordingly rejected the claim of the assessee. While doing so, ironically he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Cou rt in the case of SAIL DSP VR. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (supra) itself, by observing as follows :-
"9. As regards ground No. 3 the issue raised in the ground is not tenable as the reliance placed by the assesee on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Cour t in the case of SAIL DSP VR. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, 1998 -vs.- Union of India & Others 262 ITR 638 is mis placed as the facts in that case are different from facts of the present case. The case relied upon by the assessee pertained to employees of SAIL wher ein the Hon'ble High Court has given the finding that the scheme for Voluntary Retirement floated by SAIL confirmed to I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 14 of 17 Rule 2BA. The Hon'ble High Court also gave the finding that nowhere there was any provision in the s cheme which could be said to be in conflict with the retirements of Rule 2BA. However, in the present case, the issue relates to the Voluntary Retirement Scheme floate d by the Hongkong and Sanghai Banking Corporation Limited, and the Assessing Officer gave the finding in the assessment order that the scheme was not in conformity with Rule 2BA of Income Tax R ules, 1962. Hence, there is no error apparent from the records in the or der passed by the Assessing Officer. Hence this ground is also dismiss ed".
The assessee is aggrieved and is in appeal before us.
5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered factual matrix of the case as also the applicable legal position.
6. We find that as held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SAIL DSP VR Employees' Association (supra), undoubtedly Their Lordships held that there is no conflict between the VRS Scheme of the SAIL employee and Rule 2BA, but Their Lordships also observed as follows :-
"An expression used in the statute is not always to be interpr4eted literally or grammatically. Sometimes, it has to be interpreted having regard to the context in which the expre ssion is used and having regard to the object and purpose for which the same is enacted. Section 10(10C) was inserted in order to make voluntary retirement attractive so as to reduce human complements for securing economic viability of certain companies. This object was elaborated by various Departmental circulars and explanatory statements issued from time to time. Similarly, r. 2BA which was inserted by the IT (Sixteenth Amendment) Rules, 1992, were amended from time to time. All these go to show that I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 15 of 17 this was intended to make a voluntar y retirement more attractive and beneficial to the e mployee opting for voluntary retireme nt. Therefore, this has to be interpreted in a manner beneficial to the optee for voluntary retirement, if there is any ambituity".
7. It is thus free from any doubt that, as held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, that the p rovisions of section 10(10C) are to be "interpr eted in a manner beneficial to the optee for retir ement, if there is any ambiguity". In view of this binding legal position, it is clear that on the point of ambiguity, if any, an interpretation in favou r of the assessee is to be adopted. That is how, according to Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, section 10(10C) is to be interpreted.
8. Let us now take note of a Third Member decision of this very Tribunal in the case of DCIT -vs.- Krishna Gopal Saha (121 ITD TM
368) wherein the assessee was a former employee of Standard Chartered Bank and admittedly the voluntary retirement scheme offered by the SC B was not in conformity with Rule 2BA of the Income Tax Rules (as noted in paragraph 3.1 of the lead order). Yet, the Third Member decision was that to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/- the asessee was eligible for deduction u/s. 10(10C). In coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal, inter alia, took note of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's guidance in the matter. What is held by the Tribunal in this Third Member decision is at the minimum a possible view of the matter, and so far as this Division Bench is concerned a binding judicial precedent.
9. No doubt in a normal situation, so far as matters capable of two views being taken will be outside the ambit of section 154. However, I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 16 of 17 right now, we are dealing with interp retation of section 10(10C) and so far as this interpretation is concerned, law laid down by Hon'ble Calcutta High Cou rt is that an interpretation in favou r of the assesee is to be adopted. The real question, therefore, is whether or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme C ourt's judgment in the case of ACIT -vs.- Sau rashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon'ble jurisdictional High C ourt is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake apparent on record. That is precisely what has happened in this case. The Assessing Officer disregarded Hon'ble ju risdictional High Cou rt in the case of SAIL DSP VR Employees' Association (supra), on the ground that this issue has already been decided in assessment order and, therefore, it cannot be reconsidered, even in the light of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's decision. learned CIT(A), on the other hand, referred to an aspect of the said decision. In our considered view, what ought to have been examined by the Assessing Officer was whether, in the light of the principles laid down by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, the interpretation canvassed by the assessee could be accepted as one of the possible views of the matter. That exercise has not been done.
10. For the reasons set out above, we vacate the orders of the authorities below. Having regard to the fact that the issue was covered in favour of the assessee by a Third Member decision of this Tribunal I . T. A . N o s . : 1 4 0 7 , 1 3 4 6- 1 38 3 & 1 5 5 9 / K o l . / 2 0 11 A s s e s s m e nt y e a r : 2 0 0 4- 0 5 Page 17 of 17 in the case of Krishna Gopal Saha (supra), which constituted a possible interpretation, and which, in the light of SAIL DSP VR Employees case (supra) ou ght to have been adopted by the Assessing Officer, we uphold the grievance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to give relief.
11. In the result, I.T.A. No. 1407/Kol./2011 is allowed. All other appeals are also allowed in the same manner and to the extent indicated above. These observations will apply mutatis mutandis to those cases as well.
Pronounced in the open Court today on 30 t h day of March, 2012.
Sd/- Sd/-
Mahavir Singh Pramod Kumar
(Judicial Member) (Accountant Member)
Kolkata, the 30 t h day of March, 2012
Copies to : (1) Th e app ell ant
(2) Th e respon dent
(3) CIT
(4) CIT(A)
(5) Th e D ep artment al Rep resentativ e
(6) Guard File
By order etc
Assis tant Registrar
Income Tax Appe llate Tribunal
Kolkata benches, Kolkata
Laha/Sr. P.S.