TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 746X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... error in mentioning wrong dates of filing statement and thereby holding applicability of amended provisions. He considered the date of filing correctional statement to invoke the amended provisions which had come in to effect from 1/10/14. It can be observed that there is no dispute to the fact that in regard to present appellants, for assessment year 2010-11 summons were issued in January 2018 and the assessment orders u/s 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act have been passed on 30rd or 31st March 2018. There is no doubt that Section 201(3) of the Act provides that the assessment orders under sub section 1 of Section 201 against assessee in default for failure to deduct the whole or any part of the tax from a person resident in India can be passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccountant Member And Sh. Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Sh. Vivek Gupta, Adv. For the Revenue : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: Three appeals have been filed by the different branches of the State Bank of India, having common PAN but different TAN and against order dated 07.02.2020 in ITA no 1261 05.02.2020 in ITA no 1262 and ITA no 1297 respectively for the assessment year 2011-12 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority in short Ld. F.A.A. ) in regard to the appeal before it arising out of assessment order dated 31.03.2018 in ITA No. 1262 and assessment order dated 30.3.18 in ITA nos. 1261 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in default within the meaning of Section 201 (1)/(1A) of the Act for non-deduction of tax on such reimbursement made to its employees. 3. After taking the reply of assessee, the Ld. AO denied the benefit of Section 10(5) observing that :- As per provisions of section 10(5), only that reimbursement of travel concession or assistance to an employee is exempted which was incurred for travel of the individual employee or his family members to anti place in India. Section 10(5), read with rule 2B no way provides that assessee is at liberty to claim exemption out of his total ticket package spent on his overseas travel and part of journey within India. Therefore, LTC/LFC paid by assessee to employees involving foreign travel as well wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and on the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, the Ld AO as well as Ld CIT(A) erred in giving second chance to the Ld. AO by directing him to ascertain whether taxes has been paid or not by recipient of income. 4. That consequential to our Ground no. 1, 2 3 above, the learned AO and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in charging/ confirming interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 1,91,349/-. 5. That the appellants request be allowed to add, modify and delete any other ground (s) of appeal. 6. Heard and perused the record. 7. Primarily, the contention of Ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the order of assessment passed is beyond jurisdiction of the AO on account of being passed after prescribed period of limitation. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia vs. ACIT ITA no. 1717/Mum./2019 order dated 27.01.2021 to contend that Mumbai Tribunal has held that the employer cannot be faulted for non-deducting tax at source from the Leave Travel Concession facility allowed by him to the employees for LFC claims by employees who have taken circuitous route involving travel abroad to one or more domestic destinations. 7.2 Relying a coordinate bench order dated 3/8/22 in ITA 2615 and 2616 it was submitted that issue is now covered in favour of assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below Ld. DR while tried to distinguish the facts of the case by contention that part two of section 201(3) of Act is applicable as it is a case of not filling return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions, to the facts of the case on hand and more particularly considering the fact that while amending section 201 by Finance Act, 2014, it has been specifically mentioned that the same shall be applicable w.e.f. 1/10/2014 and even considering the fact that proceedings for F.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09 had become time barred and/or for the aforesaid financial years, limitation under section 201 (3)(i) of the Act had already expired on 31/3/2011 and 31/3/2012. respectively, much prior to the amendment in section 201 as amended by Finance Act, 2014 and therefore, as such a right has been accrued in favour of the assessee and considering the fact that wherever legislature wanted to give retrospective effect so s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
