CIT Vs. L&T Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 1 (SC0 2. CIT Vs. ITI Ltd. (2009) 221 CTR (SC) 609 3. CIT v. Gostino Mario & Others

323 ITR 670High Court2010#1856 most cited

What is CIT Vs. L&T Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 1 (SC0 2. CIT Vs. ITI Ltd. (2009) 221 CTR (SC) 609 3. CIT v. Gostino Mario & Others authority for?

An assessee-employer is not bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for claiming exemptions under Section 10(5) (LTA) and Section 10(14) (special allowances) before granting such exemptions to employees, as there is no such requirement in law.

62

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2021.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Micro Land Ltd. · Section 10(5) · Section 10(14) · employer verification · proof of journey · actual expenditure · LTA exemption · special allowance exemption · employee benefits

Judgments citing CIT Vs. L&T Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 1 (SC0 2. CIT Vs. ITI Ltd. (2009) 221 CTR (SC) 609 3. CIT v. Gostino Mario & Others

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 566/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 565/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 564/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 563/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 562/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 561/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 560/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 559/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 558/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS)- WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 557/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 556/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,CHITRADURGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 555/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 554/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 553/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 552/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 551/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 550/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 549/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 548/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,HAVERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) - WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 547/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…mption. 3.1 Useful reference could also be made to the following decisions: 1. CIT v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd.[2009] 313 ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. I.T.I. Ltd.[2009] 221 CTR (SC) 619 3. CIT v. Goslino Mario[2000] 241 ITR 312 (SC) ; and 4. CIT v. Micro Land Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 670 (Karn.) To the question as to whether assessee-employer is bound to collect and verify proof of journey and actual expenditure incurred for section 10(5) before granting exemption under that provision, it was held by the hon'ble courts that there is no such requirement in the law. The provision of section 10(14) and 10(5) are somewhat pari materi…

Showing 1–20 of 62 · Page 1 of 4