Saturday, January 31, 2009
Proof of travel not required for claiming LTA: SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 993 OF 2005 With Civil Appeal No. 992 OF 2005
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs M/s LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD
A short question which arises for determination in these Civil Appeal(s) is - whether the assessee(s) was under statutory obligation under Income Tax Act, 1961, and/or the Rules to collect evidence to show that its employee(s) had actually utilized the amount(s) paid towards Leave Travel Concession(s)/Conveyance Allowance?
It may be noted that the beneficiary of exemption under Section 10(5) is an individual employee. There is no circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) requiring the employer under Section 192 to collect and examine the supporting evidence to the Declaration to be submitted by an employee(s). For the above reasons there is no merit in the Civil Appeals and the same are dismissed with no order as to costs.
Here goes my opinion on this...
Though Sec-192 doesn't cast any "OBLIGATION" on the employer, but as a DDO (Disbursement Officer), he has the authority to collect en examine the supporting evidence.
The same rule applies for HRA, Medical Reimbursement & 80C investments as well...If you refer to the Circular on "TDS on Salaries" no where it is mentioned about collecting proofs. But as a DO, it is the employer's responsibility to ensure that the deductions he is giving to employees from his income are based on genuine proofs and not mere declarations from employees.
Though the final obligation lies on the employees, employer need to ensure that he has proper basis for the providing exemptions/deductions under various sections viz., Sec-10, 80C etc.
Just a snippet, why complicate our salary structure, can't we have everything as LTC and just a mere declaration that I have incurred my entire salary on LTC !!! What say??
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
FAQ on GST
Find enclosed Compilation of FAQ’s on GST for your ready reference. This is only for educational and guidance purposes and do not hold an...
-
Reliance Infocom Ltd. (now known as Reliance Communications Ltd.) & others. vs. DDIT(IT). ITA No. 730/Mum/09, Date of Decision 06/...
-
ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES ‘A’: MUMBAI Novartis HealthCare Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO ITA Nos. 310 to 312/Mum/2006 February 25, 2009 RELEVANT EXTRACTS: Ther...
-
Filing date changed from "14 days" from end of quarter to "15 days" from end of quarter to align with the Form 24/26Q E-...
1 comment:
If the employeer agrees then we can do the same. But STAT requires for PF to be paid for all the employees. this requires Basic salary....
Post a Comment