https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797297 Tax-deduction liability for leave travel concession reimbursements involving foreign travel does not arise automatically under Section 201(1). The Revenue must examine whether beneficiary employees have paid the relevant tax. Where a subsisting judicial direction prevented treatment of the reimbursement as income for tax-deduction purposes and placed any eventual tax liability on employees, compliance with that direction cannot create deductor default. On materially identical facts, consistency with a coordinate-Bench approach also supports deletion of demands under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A). A penalty under Section 271C founded solely on the quashed tax-deduction default has no independent basis and must also be deleted. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Aug 2026 08:14:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797297 Tax-deduction liability for leave travel concession reimbursements involving foreign travel does not arise automatically under Section 201(1). The Revenue must examine whether beneficiary employees have paid the relevant tax. Where a subsisting judicial direction prevented treatment of the reimbursement as income for tax-deduction purposes and placed any eventual tax liability on employees, compliance with that direction cannot create deductor default. On materially identical facts, consistency with a coordinate-Bench approach also supports deletion of demands under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A). A penalty under Section 271C founded solely on the quashed tax-deduction default has no independent basis and must also be deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797297