Sri Pradip Barma, Jalpaiguri V. A.C.I.T. Cir - 2,Jalpaiguri, Jaipur

ITA 1746/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 174623514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M L SARDAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NEHA POPAT A
• Section: 10; 10(14)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1746/KOL. /2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER), AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO. 1746/KOL./ 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008 SRI PRADIP BARMA,.................................. ...........APPELLANT MORAPORA CHOWPATHI, BANGCHATRA ROAD, P.O. & DISTRICT COOCHBEHAR-735217 [PAN :ACZPB 7976 M] -VS.- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,............ ...........RESPONDENT CIRCLE-2, JALPAIGURI APPEARANCES BY: MS. NEHA POPAT, A.C.A., FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI M.L. SARDAR, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JULY 15, 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JULY 17, 2014 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JALPAIGURI IN APPEAL NO. 37/CIT(A)/JAL/09-10 DATED 26.06.2012 FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. MS. NEHA POPAT, A.C.A., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI M.L. SARDAR, LD. JCIT, SR. D.R., REPRESENTED O N BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISE D THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (1) FOR THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS NOT AS PER THE PROVI SIONS OF LAW. (2) FOR THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT( A) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING EXEMPTIONS OF RS.95,952/- AS REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES RECEIPT FROM THE EMPLOYER. I.T.A. NO. 1746/KOL. /2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 2 OF 3 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED EMPLOYEE OF LICI. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES TO AN EXTENT OF RS.95,953 /-. LD. A.R. DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE LICI TO THIS EFFECT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES WAS N OT LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN SO FAR AS THE LICI HAS GIVEN THE NECESSARY CERTIFICATE AND THE REQUIREMENT UNDER RULE 2BB ALONG WITH SECTION 10(14) OF THE ACT WOULD APPLY. LD. A.R . DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUN AL IN THE CASE OF OTHER DEVELOPMENT OFFICERS OF THE LICI IN ITA NOS. 1734 & 1735/KOL/2011 IN THE CASE OF RABINDRA KRISHNA DEY AND KOUSHIK SARKAR , ORDER DATED 25.09.2012, WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TR IBUNAL HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS:- 4.2. WITH REGARD TO THE ASSESSEES SECOND GRIEVANC E, I.E., THE DISALLOWANCE IN THE SUM OF RS.86,008/- HIS CASE WOULD FIRSTLY STAND TO BE RESTRICTED TO RS.78,255/-, EVEN AS CONCEDED TO BY THE LD. AR BEFORE US. ON MERITS, THO UGH IT IS CORRECT THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT WOULD APPLY AND NOT THE INTERNAL RULES BY AN EMPLOYER, THE MATTER AS AP PARENT FROM THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF SATISH GUPTA VS.- ITO(SUPRA) RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE, HAS RECEIVE D THE CONSIDERATION BY THE CBDT AND THE MINISTRY OF LAW, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT THE CERTIFICATE FROM AN EMPLOYER, WHERE THE OBJECT MATTER OF THE EXPENDITUR E IS COVERED BY RULE 2BB OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962, WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 10 (14)(I) OF THE ACT. THE SAID CERTIFICATE, IN THE INSTANT CA SE, APPEARS AT PAGE 9 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK. WE, THEREFO RE, HAVE NO HESITATION IN DIRECTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE T O THAT EXTENT. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN REPLY, LD. SR. D.R. VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(APPEALS). I.T.A. NO. 1746/KOL. /2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 3 OF 3 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF RA BINDRA KRISHNA DEY AND KOUSHIK SARKAR REFERRED TO SUPRA AND AS THE ASS ESSEE HAS ALSO DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE EMPL OYER, NAMELY LICI CONFIRMING THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES, WE RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, THE ADDITION AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT( APPEALS) STANDS DELETED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JULY, 2014. SD/- SD/- SHAMIM YAHYA GEORGE MATHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JU DICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 17 TH DAY OF JULY, 2014 COPIES TO : (1) SRI PRADIP BARMA, MORAPORA CHOWPATHI, BANGCHATRA ROAD, P.O. & DISTRICT COOCHBEHAR-735217 (2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JALPAIGURI (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.