ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.11 SECTION IV-A SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10502/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14-07-2021 in ITA No. 277/2015 passed by High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru) INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE Petitioner(s) VERSUS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.) WITH SLP(C) No. 10991/2022 (IV-A) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.) Date : 14-07-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kavita Jha, AOR Mr. Anant Mann, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER We have heard Shri Arvind P. Datar, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of petitioner. We have gone through impugned judgment and order passed by High Court. Insofar as finding recorded by High Court that even if petitioner may be considered as State instrumentality within definition of Article 12 of Constitution of India, same Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by R cannot Natarajan Date: 2022.07.16 12:49:37 IST be treated at par with Central/State Government Reason: employees under Table-I of Rule 3 of Income Tax Rules, 1962 and that rules applicable to government employees for 2 purpose of computing value of perquisites under Section 17(2) of Act would be applicable in case of petitioner is concerned, we are in complete agreement with view taken by High Court. Merely because petitioner might have adopted Central Government Rules and/or pay-scales etc., by that itself, it cannot be said that petitioner is Central/State Government. No interference of this Court is called for. Insofar as merits of claim is concerned, according to Shri Datar, learned Senior Advocate, some of crucial aspects have not been considered on merits by High Court and, therefore, petitioner proposes to file review application before High Court pointing out certain aspects on merits. Without expressing anything on same, we simply permit petitioner to file review application on aforesaid only. As and when such review application is filed, same be considered in accordance with law and on its own merits for which this Court has not expressed anything in favour of either of parties. However, it is made clear that petitioner is not permitted to file review on aspect which is concluded as above, namely, that whether petitioner can be treated at par with Central/State Government employees or not for purpose of Section 17. With this, present Special Leave Petitions stand dismissed/disposed of. (R. NATARAJAN) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Indian Institute of Science v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax