The Kerala High Court has held that the appeal against denial of tax exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to ICICI Bank retiree on retirement compensation cannot be dismissed for non-appearance.
The bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. has observed that Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, which deals with the procedure in appeal, there is no provision for rejecting an appeal for non appearance of the appellant. Therefore, in the absence of any such provision, irrespective of the question the appellant had appeared or not, the appellate authority has to take decision by strictly following the mandate contemplated under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which can only be a decision answering the points raised in the appeal.
The petitioner/assessee was an employee of ICICI Bank, who took voluntary retirement during the assessment year 2004-05. As part of the benefits of the retirement scheme, he received a compensation of Rs.4,52,814/-. He submitted a return of income for the said assessment year claiming the relief under Section 89(1) amounting to Rs.24,353/. Subsequently he submitted a rectification application, seeking exemption under Section 10(10C) on retirement compensation, which was turned down by the assessing officer.
A revision petition was submitted by the petitioner before the respondent department, which was rejected, relegating the petitioner to invoke the appellate remedies. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted an appeal before the department, by which the appeal was dismissed.
According to the petitioner, the order was not passed in compliance with the statutory requirements stipulated under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which requires an order stating the points for determination of the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision are to be mentioned.
The specific challenge raised by the petitioner is on the ground that the order does not conform to the statutory requirements contemplated under the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
On the other hand, the department submitted that the appeal was rejected for non- appearance of the petitioner despite repeated opportunities.
The court held that order cannot be treated as an order passed in tune with the statutory requirements and therefore, it requires reconsideration.
Case Details
Case Title: Anandan N. Versus The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
Case No.: WP(C) NO. 11709 OF 2023
Date: 30/05/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Sanjana R.Nair
Counsel For Respondent: Jose Joseph
Read More: GST Dept. To Issue Separate Show-Cause Notices For Different Assessment Years: Kerala HC
