Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for assessment year 1971-72, the value of the perquisite arising from rent-free residential accommodation provided by the employer could be limited to the standard rent fixed under the rent control law.
Analysis: The question was treated as covered by binding precedent holding that where a company's property is used by a director, the absence of a formal letting does not prevent valuation of the accommodation on the basis of standard rent under the applicable rent control regime. The court followed that view and applied the principle that standard rent is the proper measure for determining the value of such a rent-free accommodation perquisite.
Conclusion: The perquisite was to be valued on the basis of standard rent, and the Tribunal's view limiting the valuation was upheld in favour of the assessee.