Case Number: ITA 659/DEL/2019
Appellant: Ranvir Singh Chaudhary, New Delhi
Respondent: DCIT, Circle-68(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2014-15
Result: Appeal Allowed
Case Filed On: 2019-01-30
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2021-07-29
Pronounced On: 2021-07-29
Ranvir Singh Chaudhary, an employee of LIC of India, filed an appeal against the assessment order for the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal was filed challenging the addition of Rs. 4,13,210 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of various allowances claimed as exempt under section 10(14) of the Income Tax Act.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed discrepancies in the salary income declared by the appellant. According to Form 26AS, TDS was deducted on a salary income of Rs. 25,18,896, whereas the appellant declared a salary income of Rs. 20,94,610. The appellant claimed an exemption of Rs. 4,22,810 under section 10(14) for the following allowances:
After considering the appellant’s explanations, the AO disallowed Rs. 4,13,210 out of the claimed amount, allowing only Rs. 9,600 as exempt.
The appellant challenged the AO’s decision before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the CIT(A) upheld the AO’s decision, leading to the appellant filing a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
The appellant’s counsel, Shri Dharamvir Taneja, CA, relied on several judicial decisions to support the claim that conveyance allowance and additional conveyance allowance are allowable under section 10(14). The key decisions cited include:
The counsel argued that the CIT(A) had erred in not considering these precedents and requested the ITAT to allow the exemptions claimed.
The ITAT, presided over by Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member, considered the arguments and examined the case details. The Tribunal noted that the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT vs. A.K. Ghosh had held that conveyance allowance and additional conveyance allowance received by Development Officers of LIC are exempt under section 10(14). Further, the ITAT Visakhapatnam Bench, in the case of Thangirala Immanuel vs. ITO, had ruled similarly, allowing exemptions for such allowances.
The Tribunal observed that the AO had not found any defects in the books of accounts or the vouchers submitted by the appellant. The disallowance was primarily based on the AO’s interpretation of the provisions, which contradicted established judicial precedents.
Considering the judicial precedents and the facts of the case, the ITAT concluded that the appellant was entitled to the exemption of Rs. 4,13,210 on account of additional conveyance allowance, fixed conveyance allowance, and allowance to Development Officers for procuring business. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and allowed the appeal filed by the appellant.
Source: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘SMC-1’, New Delhi
Disclaimer: This article provides an overview of the case and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. For detailed information, readers are encouraged to refer to the official case documents and consult with a qualified legal professional.
Ranvir Singh Chaudhary vs DCIT: Appeal on Conveyance Allowance for AY 2014-15
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform