ITEM NO.101                 COURT NO.5                  SECTION IIIA

           S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                          RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                 CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1001 OF 2005

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX & ANR.                         Appellant (s)

                     VERSUS

I.T.I. LTD.                                          Respondent(s)

(With office report)

WITH  Civil Appeal NO. 1002-1009 of 2005 – With office report

Date: 21/01/2009  This Appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.H. KAPADIA         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AFTAB ALAM

For Appellant(s)     Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr.Adv.                      Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.                      Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Adv.                      Mr. B.V. Balaram Das,Adv.                      For Respondent(s)    Mr. T.L. Vishwanatha Iyer, Sr.Adv.                      Mr. Rajiv Tyagi,Adv.                      Mr. Chanchal Biswal, Adv.                      Mr. Vikas Mishra, Adv.

                    Mr. P.J. Pardiwalla, S.Adv.                      Mr. Rustom B.Hathikhanawala, Adv.                 

      UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                            O R D E R  

The appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.

         (S. Thapar)         PS to Registrar

(Madhu Saxena) Court Master

The signed order is placed on the file.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1001 OF 2005

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX & ANR. ...APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS

I.T.I. LIMITED        ...RESPONDENT(S)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1002 TO 1009 OF 2005

     O R D E R

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.

....................J. [ S.H. KAPADIA ]

New Delhi, ....................J January 21, 2009 [ AFTAB ALAM ]