STATE BANK OF INDIA, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-2, JAIPUR

SA 14/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3594 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA DCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: NEELAM ASHOK
• Keywords: Application of stay; TDS
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKWY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SI NGH YADAV, AM STAY APPLICATION NO. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 871, 872, 873 & 8 91/JP/2017) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 & 2014-15 STATE BANK OF INDIA , JAIPUR CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ T AN NO. JPRS11979C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SMT. NEELAM ASHOK (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R. A. VERMA (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/12/2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/12/2017 PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE STAY PETITIONS HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST THE O RDER PASSED BY THE ITO U/S 201(1) TREATING THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT READ WITH S ECTION 201(1A) AND RAISING DEMAND OF TAX AND INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,14,64 7/- FOR AY 2013-14, RS. 1,79,407/- FOR AY 2014-15, RS. 2,84,435/- FOR AY 20 14-15 & RS. 1,65,161/- FOR AY 2014-15 RESPECTIVELY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ITO OB SERVED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT DEDUCTED TDS ON THE AMOUNT OF REIMBURSEMENT OF LTC/LFC GIVEN TO THE EMPLOYEES WHERE FOREIGN DESTINATION WAS INCLUDED IN THE ITINERARY OF THEIR JOURNEY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFERRED TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(5) OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 2B OF THE INCOME TAX RULES AND HELD THAT THE E XEMPTION IS AVAILABLE ONLY FOR TRAVEL TO ANY PLACE IN INDIA AND RESTRICTED TO THE AMOUNT OF EXPENSES ACTUALLY INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUCH TRAVEL TO ANY PLA CE ANY INDIA. THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT HAVING N OT DEDUCTED TDS ON THE SAID AMOUNT OF LTC/LFC REIMBURSEMENT AND DEMAND TOWARDS TAX AND INTEREST WAS RAISED 2 S.A NO. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 STATE BANK OF INDIA, JAIPUR VS. I.T.O, JAI PUR ON THE ASSESSEE. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARR IED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE SAID DEMAND IN ALL THESE YEARS FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF JAIPUR BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ACIT (ITA NO. 145/JP/2017 AND 146/JP/2017 DATED 28.03.2017) BESIDES THE DECISIONS OF CHANDIGARH BENCH IN CASE OF OM PRAKASH GUPTA (ITA NO. 938/CHD/2011 DATED 29.04.2013) AND LUCKNOW BENCH IN CASE OF SBI, KANPUR ( (ITA NO. 138- 140/LKW/2015 DATED 04.03.2016). AGAINST THE SAID ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND HAS ALSO REQUESTED FOR STAY ON DEMAND. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD AR HAS REQ UESTED THAT THE STAY MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED TILL DISPOSAL OF APPEAL FILED BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE GRANT OF STAY ON THE OUTSTANDING DEM AND. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT TH E CO-ORDINATE BENCHES HAVE ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW IN THE MATTER WHICH IS FAVOURI NG THE REVENUE AND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. NO CONTRARY AUTHORITY HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE OUT A PRIMA FACIE CASE IN RESPECT OF ITS PETITION FOR STAY OF DEMAND. FURTHER, NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD WHICH C AUSES ANY UNDUE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THE ASSESSEE OR THE FACT THAT THE RECIP IENTS OF SAID LTC/LFC REIMBURSEMENTS HAVE OFFERED THE SAME IN THEIR RESPE CTIVE RETURN OF INCOME AND TAXES HAVE EITHER BEEN PAID OR RECOVERED DIRECTLY F ROM THEM. 5. IN LIGHT OF ABOVE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO GRANT ANY STAY IN THE MATTER AND THE SUBJECT STAY PETITIONS ARE HEREBY DISMISSED. AT THE SAME TIME, THE LD AR REQUEST FOR EARLY HEARING IN RESPECT OF MAIN APPEALS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY GRANTED TO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS ON MERIT. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECT ED TO LIST THE MATTER FOR HEARING ON 08.01.2018 AND THE PARTIES ARE AT LIBERTY, TO FI LE NECESSARY PAPERBOOK, WHERE REQUIRED, ONE WEEK IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED HEAR ING. WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS, ALL THESE STAY PETITIONS ARE DISPOSED OFF. 3 S.A NO. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 STATE BANK OF INDIA, JAIPUR VS. I.T.O, JAI PUR ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/12/2017. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKWY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 11/12/2017. GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- STATE BANK OF INDIA, JAIPUR 2. THE RESPONDENT INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (S.A NO. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 4 S.A NO. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 STATE BANK OF INDIA, JAIPUR VS. I.T.O, JAI PUR