INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), RAIPUR vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE JAGDALPUR, JAGDALPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर �ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR �ी पाथ� सारथी चौधरी, �ाियक सद� एवं �ी अवधेश कुमार िम�, लेखा सद� के सम� BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 454/RPR/2026 (िनधा�रण वष� Assessment Year: 2012-13) Income Tax Officer (TDS), Raipur, Vs State Bank of India, Regional Office, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Dharampura Road, Raipur-492001, Chhattisgarh. Opp. Gayatri Mandir, Jagdalpur -1 PAN: JBPS02288G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ� / Respondent) : िनधा�रती की ओर से / Assessee by : None. (Adjournment petition filed) राज� की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 06/07/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of : 08/07/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, AM: This appeal for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2012-13 filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 31.03.2026 of Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Siliguri [‘Addl./Joint CIT(A)] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

ITA No.454/RPR/2026 ITO (TDS), Raipur vs. SBI, Regional Office, Jagdalpur 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee’s office at Jagdalpur was surveyed under section 133A(2A) of the Act during the Financial Year (‘FY’) 2017-18. The Survey Team noticed that the assessee had not Deducted Tax at Source (‘TDS’) on Leave Fare Concession (LFC)/Leave Travel Concession (LTC) granted to its employees on the reasoning that the same was non-taxable being exempted under section 10(5) of the Act though the employees of assessee were found adopting circuitous routes covering places abroad while availing LFC/LTC. Based on the survey finding, the Ld. AO passed order under section 201(1) read with section 201(1A) of the Act of the relevant year on 16.01.2019 raising demand of Rs.5,70,900/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority, who allowed the appeal as under: “5.Decision: The instant appeal was instituted against the order passed u/s 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core issue involved in the appeal relates to disallowance of LFC granted to the employees of SBI involving Foreign Destinations during the Leave Fare Concession. The facts in brief are a spot verification u/s 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the appellant to examine as to whether the re- imbursement made under Leave Fare Concession scheme of the State Bank of India to employees who have carried out circuitous tour, covering foreign destination was considered as part of taxable income of those employees and to ascertain whether TDS u/s 192 of the Act was duly deducted on such reimbursements. During the proceedings, it was noticed that many of the officials of SBI have availed LFC/LTC Scheme and carried out circuitous tour which includes foreign travel before/after reaching the destination. According to the eligibility criteria, reimbursement was made to the extent of actual tour expenses and same were claimed, to be exempt as per the provisions of section10 (5) of the Act. The Ld. AO observed that the wording and intention of the section10 (5) is explicit. The benefit of exemption under the said section is available only in case of proceeding on leave to any place in India and not for International Travel. Accordingly, notice u/s 201(1)/(1A) of the Act was issued and bank was asked to show cause as to why the deductor bank should not be held as an assesses in default within the meaning of section 201(1)/(1A)

ITA No.454/RPR/2026 ITO (TDS), Raipur vs. SBI, Regional Office, Jagdalpur of the Act for non-deduction of tax on such reimbursement made to its employees. Primarily, the contention of the appellant is that the order of assessment passed is beyond jurisdiction of the AO on account of being passed after prescribed period of limitation. It was submitted that the appellant was served notice u/s 201(1) on 13.12.2018 in connection with TDS proceedings pertaining to F.Y. 2011-12. It was submitted that Section 201(3) inserted vide Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 01.04.2010 provided limitation of 2 years from the end of Financial year in which TDS statements is filed and 6 years from the end of financial years where the statement had not been filed. it was submitted that the assesse was regularly filing TDS statements. The time limit for passing order u/s 201(1) is mandated by Finance Act 2012, which is reproduced below:- "201(3) — No order shall be made under sub-section (1) deeming a person to be an assessee in default for failure to deduct the whole or any part of the tax form a person resident in India, at any time after the expiry of --- (i) two years from the end of the financial year in which the statements is filed in a case where the statement referred to in section 200 has been filed: (ii) six years from the end of the financial year in which payment is made or credit is given. in any other case." In this case the assessee has filed statement for the A.Y. 2011-12 and order u/s 201(1) has been passed on 16.01.2019, which is beyond the time limit as mentioned in Section 201(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, the impugned order passed was without jurisdiction as the same was passed beyond the limitation period of two years and accordingly the ground no.1 as raised stands allowed in favour of the assessee declaring assessment order to be void ab-initio requiring no further determination of issues raised in remaining grounds. Consequently, the appeal is allowed.” 4. None attended on behalf of the assessee to represent the case. However, an adjournment petition was filed by the respondent assessee, which was not acceded to. The Revenue’s case therefore, was heard.

ITA No.454/RPR/2026 ITO (TDS), Raipur vs. SBI, Regional Office, Jagdalpur exempted under section 10(5) of the Act. However, on our specific query regarding maintainability of appeal in view of the low tax effect, he admitted that the tax effect in this case was quite low than the threshold limit of Rs.60 lakhs prescribed in Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 for filing appeal before the Tribunal.

Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) �ाियक सद� / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; िदनांक Dated 08/07/2026 HKS, PS

ITA No.454/RPR/2026 ITO (TDS), Raipur vs. SBI, Regional Office, Jagdalpur आदेशकी �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��थ�/ The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, Digitally signed Hem Kumari by Hem Kumari Shrivastava, Shrivastava, PS, //True copy// PS, ITAT, ITAT, Raipur Date: 2026.07.08 Raipur 18:25:53 +05'30' (Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur