Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
State Bank Of India, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, Tds-2, Jaipur on 11 December, 2017
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; ikWy jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM Stay Application No. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 871, 872, 873 & 891/JP/2017) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank of India, cuke Income Tax Officer, Jaipur Vs. Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@TAN 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 order passed by the ITO u/s 201(1) treating the assessee in default read with section 201(1A) and raising demand of tax and interest amounting to Rs. 1,14,647/- for AY 2013-14, Rs. 1,79,407/- for AY 2014-15, Rs. 2,84,435/- for AY 2014-15 & Rs. 1,65,161/- for AY 2014-15 respectively.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that ITO observed 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 exemption 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 place any India. The assessee was accordingly treated as assessee in default having not 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, Jaipur on the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried 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 requested that the stay may kindly be granted till disposal of appeal filed before the Tribunal. Per contra, the ld. DR opposed the grant of stay on the outstanding demand.
4. After hearing both the parties, we find that the Co-ordinate Benches have already taken a view in the matter which is favouring 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 causes any undue financial hardship to the assessee or the fact that the recipients of said LTC/LFC reimbursements have offered the same in their respective return of income and taxes have either been paid or recovered directly from 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 the assessee is hereby granted to hear the arguments on merit. The Registry is directed to list the matter for hearing on 08.01.2018 and the parties are at liberty, to file necessary paperbook, where required, one week in advance of the scheduled hearing.
With the above directions, all these stay petitions are disposed off.
3S.A No. 14, 15, 16 & 17/JP/2017 State Bank of India, Jaipur vs. I.T.O, Jaipur Order pronounced in the open court on 11/12/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
¼fot; ikWy jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½
(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 vxzfs "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, Jaipur