ITO v. Avirook Sen - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Arunbhai R. Naik v. ITO 2015 TaxPub(DT) 4377 (Guj-HC)
REFERRED Khanna & Annadhanam v. Commissioner of Income-tax 2013 TaxPub(DT) 0829 (Del-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Deepak Verma 2010 TaxPub(DT) 2253 (Del-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Deepak Verma 2010 TaxPub(DT) 2253 (Del-HC)
REFERRED Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 2009 TaxPub(DT) 1638 (Mum-Trib)
REFERRED P. Arunachalam v. CIT 2000 TaxPub(DT) 0135 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED G.N. Badami v. CIT 1999 TaxPub(DT) 0244 (Mad-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1922 (Del-Trib) IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH G.S. PANNU, V.P. & ASTHA CHANDRA, J.M. ITO v. Avirook Sen ITA No. 6659/Del/2015 12 April, 2024 Appellant by: Vivek Bansal, Adv. & Vishal Chechi, Adv. Respondent by: Anuj Garg, Sr. DR ORDER *G.S. Pannu, V.P.* This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 15-10.2015 passed by Commissioner (Appeals)-14, New Delhi in Appeal No. 15/11-12/IT/Del/2015-16, wherein an addition of Rs. 2,13,08,444 made by assessing officer in the income of assessee for the income of assessment year 2009-10 was deleted. 2. The brief facts leading to this appeal state that learned assessing officer added an amount of Rs. 2,00,00,000 received by the respondent-assessee from his employer INX Media after his termination from service and Rs. 13,08,444 received as perquisites from the employer has been added in the total income of the assessee as profits in lieu of salary for assessment year 2009-10, vide assessment order dated 30-3-2011 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee preferred an appeal against the order passed by the assessing officer before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) allowed assessees appeal and set aside assessing officers addition thereby leading to this appeal. 3. Revenue Department has filed this appeal raising following grounds : 1. Whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in holding that the payment of Rs. 2 crore received by the assessee from his employer was not salary though clause (i) sub section (3) of section 17 expressly provides that such payments are profits in lieu of salary. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1922 (Del-Trib)

IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH

G.S. PANNU, V.P. & ASTHA CHANDRA, J.M.

ITO v. Avirook Sen

ITA No. 6659/Del/2015

12 April, 2024

Appellant by: Vivek Bansal, Adv. & Vishal Chechi, Adv.

Respondent by: Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

ORDER

G.S. Pannu, V.P.

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 15-10.2015 passed by Commissioner (Appeals)-14, New Delhi in Appeal No. 15/11-12/IT/Del/2015-16, wherein an addition of Rs. 2,13,08,444 made by assessing officer in the income of assessee for the income of assessment year 2009-10 was deleted.

2. The brief facts leading to this appeal state that learned assessing officer added an amount of Rs. 2,00,00,000 received by the respondent-assessee from his employer INX Media after his termination from service and Rs. 13,08,444 received as perquisites from the employer has been added in the total income of the assessee as profits in lieu of salary for assessment year 2009-10, vide assessment order dated 30-3-2011 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee preferred an appeal against the order passed by the assessing officer before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) allowed assessees appeal and set aside assessing officers addition thereby leading to this appeal.

3. Revenue Department has filed this appeal raising following grounds :

1. Whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in holding that the payment of Rs. 2 crore received by the assessee from his employer was not salary though clause (i) sub section (3) of section 17 expressly provides that such payments are profits in lieu of salary.