STATE BANK OF INDIA vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

- 1 -

ITA No. 765 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 765 OF 2018 BETWEEN: STATE BANK OF INDIA BAGMANE TECH PARK BRANCH UNIT 13 GROUNG FLOOR BAGMANE COMMERCIAL ESCAPE MALL C V RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 093 PAN:AAACS8577K REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER SRI VENKATAKRISHNAN DHARMARAJAN AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SON OF SRI DHARMARAJAN …APPELLANT (BY SMT.JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE (VC)

AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX (TDS) CIRCLE-18 (2) (TDS CIRCLE 3(1) NO.59 HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD BENGALURU – 560 032 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, STANDING COUNSEL)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO (A) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE; (B) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.06.2018 IN SO FAR IT PERTAINS TO THE APPELLANT'S APPEAL IN ITA NO.1309/BANG/2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012, ETC.

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

ITA No. 765 of 2018

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY P.S.DINESH KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal by the assessee, challenging the order dated 15.06.2018 in ITA No.1309/Bang/2017 has been admitted to consider following questions : "1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? 2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 red with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section 10(5) of the IT Act 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 when the employee has undertaken circuitous route which included foreign leg, the exemption is totally denied without considering the expenditure involved by the shortest route from the place of departure to the place of destination when both the places are within India?

- 3 -

ITA No. 765 of 2018

Shri K.V. Aravind, learned Standing Counsel for Revenue submits that three questions raised in this appeal are covered against the assessee’s case in State Bank of India v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax1.

The said submission is not disputed by Smt Jinita Chatterji, learned Advocate for the appellant-assessee.

In view of the above, the following :

ORDER i) Appeal is dismissed. ii) Questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

No costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

RS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69

1 Civil appeal No.8181 of 2022 dated 4.11.2022

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER