Rasikutti Chinnapaiyan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
The Tribunal condoned a 56-day delay considering reasonable causes like illness and advanced age. On merits, it held that gratuity disallowance made without examining supporting evidence was unsustainable. Accordingly, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication after proper verification of documents.
In this case before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai, the assessee, an individual and retired salary employee, challenged the assessment order and appellate order for the Assessment Year 2018–19. The assessee had filed a return declaring income of ₹3,56,726, which was later reassessed by the Assessing Officer (AO) at ₹23,54,830. The AO denied deduction of gratuity amounting to ₹20 lakhs under Section 10(10CC) on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish supporting documentary evidence. The assessee contended that gratuity, being a retirement benefit, should be excluded from taxable income and that the employer had wrongly included it while deducting tax at source.
The assessee’s appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was dismissed for non-prosecution and delay, without examining the merits or evidences. The assessee then approached the Tribunal with a delay of 56 days, attributing it to age, illness, and health issues. The Tribunal accepted the explanation, condoned the delay, and admitted the appeal.
