Vinaya Vinayak Apte Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Relevant Facts
In Vinaya Vinayak Apte v. ITO, the Bangalore Bench of the ITAT dealt with two appeals concerning AYs 2020–21 & 2021–22. The assessee was an employee of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, an undertaking functioning under the administrative control of the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India.
To revive BSNL & MTNL, the Union Cabinet approved a restructuring plan through an Office Memorandum dated 29 October 2019. The package reduced workforce through the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019 for employees aged 50 years or above, who received scheme-based ex gratia compensation.
The assessee received ₹9,13,450 during AY 2020–21 & ₹20,04,922 during AY 2021–22. Owing to incorrect professional advice, he claimed only the restricted exemption of ₹5 lakh u/s 10(10C) for AY 2020–21. For AY 2021–22, he offered the entire compensation to tax. Both returns were processed through intimations u/s 143(1) on the basis of the income originally returned.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee contended that the payments represented retrenchment compensation, making the eligible amount exempt u/s 10(10B), rather than attracting only the limited relief u/s 10(10C). Though raised for the first time in appeal, the Addl./Joint CIT(A) dismissed both appeals for delay without examining merits. The assessee approached the ITAT.
