Fringe benefit tax applies only to employment-linked expenditure; medical reimbursement was excluded and one liability remanded.

Fringe benefit tax under Chapter XII-H applies only where the expenditure has a nexus with employment, because the deeming list in section 115WB(2) cannot be read beyond the statutory charging framework. On that basis, listed expenditure was taxable only to the extent incurred in consideration for employment. Group accident policy premium was not shown to fall within the employees' welfare exception, so the levy was sustained. Medical reimbursement up to the exempt employee limit was held outside the FBT base and deleted. The issue of disallowable expenses was remanded for fresh computation in line with the existing disallowance and CBDT clarification.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether expenditure covered by section 115WB(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is liable to fringe benefit tax only when incurred in consideration for employment; (ii) whether insurance premium on a group accident policy qualifies for exclusion under the employees' welfare exception in section 115WB(2)(E); (iii) whether medical reimbursement up to the exempt limit is chargeable to fringe benefit tax in the hands of the employer; and (iv) whether the liability on disallowable expenses under assessment needs to be reworked in the light of the disallowance already attained finality.

Issue (i): Whether expenditure covered by section 115WB(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is liable to fringe benefit tax only when incurred in consideration for employment.

Analysis: Section 115WA levies fringe benefit tax on fringe benefits provided or deemed to have been provided by an employer. Section 115WB(1) defines fringe benefits as consideration for employment, and that expression governs the Chapter as a whole. The deeming fiction in section 115WB(2) cannot be read in isolation so as to tax every listed expense regardless of its nexus with employment. A CBDT circular cannot enlarge the charging provision beyond the statute, and the legislative intent is to tax collective employee benefits attributable to employment.

Conclusion: Yes. The expenditure listed in section 115WB(2) is chargeable to fringe benefit tax only to the extent it is incurred in consideration for employment, and the assessee succeeds on this issue.

Issue (ii): Whether insurance premium on a group accident policy qualifies for exclusion under the employees' welfare exception in section 115WB(2)(E).

Analysis: The premium was not shown to be incurred in discharge of a statutory obligation or within the express exceptions carved out by the Explanation to section 115WB(2)(E). In the absence of cogent material bringing the expenditure within the statutory exception, the disallowance was sustained.

Conclusion: No. The levy of fringe benefit tax on the insurance premium was upheld against the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether medical reimbursement up to the exempt limit is chargeable to fringe benefit tax in the hands of the employer.

Analysis: Medical reimbursement to the extent exempt in the hands of the employee is treated as a perquisite and not as a fringe benefit for the purpose of Chapter XII-H. The exemption structure indicates that such reimbursement does not fall within the tax base for fringe benefit tax merely because it is not taxable in the employee's hands up to the specified limit.

Conclusion: No. Fringe benefit tax on medical reimbursement was deleted and the assessee succeeds on this issue.

Issue (iv): Whether the liability on disallowable expenses under assessment needs to be reworked in the light of the disallowance already attained finality.

Analysis: Since the related disallowance had already attained finality, the matter required recomputation of fringe benefit tax in accordance with the CBDT clarification governing disallowable expenses. The proper course was to send the matter back for fresh computation on that limited aspect.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for reworking of the liability, and the assessee succeeds partly on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed in part. Fringe benefit tax was confined to expenses having nexus with employment, one levy was sustained, one was deleted, and one issue was sent back for recomputation.

Ratio Decidendi: For fringe benefit tax under Chapter XII-H, the deeming provision in section 115WB(2) operates only where the relevant expenditure is incurred in consideration for employment; a circular cannot expand the charge beyond the statutory text.

---