Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore
M/S Infosys Bpo Ltd.,, Bangalore vs Department Of Income Tax on 11 February, 2013
ITA.544/Bang/2012 Page - 1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH 'A', BANGALORE
BEFORE SHRI. N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT
AND
SHRI. GEORGE GEORGE K. JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A No.544/Bang/2012
(Assessment Year : 2006-07)
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,
Circle - 11(4), Bangalore .. Appellant
v.
M/s. Infosys BPO Ltd,
Plot No.26/3, 26/4, 26/6, Electronic City,
Konappana Agrahara, Hosur Road,
Bangalore 560 100 .. Respondent
PAN : AACCP4478N
Appellant by : Shri. Bijoy Kumar Panda, Addl.CIT
Respondent by : Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CA
Date of hearing : 11.02.2013
Date of pronouncement : 11.02.2013
ORDER
PER N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT :
This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 in the case of M/s. Infosys BPO Ltd, Bangalore, against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Bangalore, dated.17.02.2012.
02. The only issue brought before us by the Revenue is whether the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the ITA.544/Bang/2012 Page - 2 addition of Rs.4,18,829/- as value of fringe benefits on 'Visa Charges and other account' u/s.115WB(2)(f) of the IT Act, 1961, without appreciating the facts and circumstances under which the addition was made by the Assessing Officer. The other connected grounds read as under :
3) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not appreciated the fact that the expenses debited under the head 'Visa charges and other account' like work permits, business visas etc., are indispensable part of foreign travel and are covered by the provisions of Sec.115WB(2)(f) of the IT Act, 1961.
4) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in allowing the relief, relying on his decision in the case of assessee's parent company, M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., for earlier years, without appreciating that the matter has not reached its finality and appeal has been filed before the Hon'ble ITAT against such order.
03. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the facts and materials on record. The learned counsel for the assessee placed on record a copy of the order dated.08.06.2012 in ITA No.96/Bang/2011, for the same assessment year, in M/s. Infosys ITA.544/Bang/2012 Page - 3 Technologies Ltd., and claimed that the very same issue was elaborately considered in the said order and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.
04. From ground no.3 raised before us, it transpires that the Revenue is claiming that the matter has not reached finality as appeal was filed before the ITAT against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the case of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., However, the assessee's counsel has placed on record copy of the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Infosys Technologies whereby the Tribunal following the co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor P. Ltd., in ITA No.20/Bang/2011, dated.11.05.2012 has dismissed the Revenue's appeal. In other words, the appeal in the case of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., has attained finality by the above said order. Further nothing has been brought on record by the Revenue to show that the said order of the Tribunal has been disturbed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. In such facts and circumstances, the decision of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., cited supra is holding the field and we are bound by the said decision. Further, we do not find any change in the facts and circumstances of this case from that of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., In the case of ITA.544/Bang/2012 Page - 4 M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., at para no.6.3 of the order, the Tribunal has observed as under :
"6.3 In the instant case, the expenses incurred under the head "Visa Charges and Others" is a legitimate business expenditure incurred by the assessee. They are statutory in nature and are neither paid to the employees nor incurred for the benefit of the employees of the assessee company. These charges are not incurred or paid as a consideration for employment. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor P. Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicable to the instant case. The findings of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in concluding that the expenses under the head "Visa Charges and Others"
are not liable for FBT are correct, for the above reasons and is in accordance with law."
05. Hence, following the above decision of this Tribunal, we are dismissing the present Revenue's appeal
06. In the result, Revenus's appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11.02.2012, after the hearing.
(GEORGE GEORGE K) (N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT ITA.544/Bang/2012 Page - 5