Section 10(5) read with rule 2B not indicate any requirement of taking shortest route

State Bank of India Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

A plain reading of the section 10(5) read with rule 2B does not indicate any requirement of taking the shortest route for travelling to “any place in India” or putting any kind of restrictions the route to be adopted for going to such a destination. Quite to the contrary, the statutory provisions do envisage the possibilities of someone taking a route other than the shortest route, as is implicit in the restriction that “an amount not exceed

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.