TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether expenditure incurred by the assessee on maintenance of a building owned by it and used by the Managing Director as residence was to be excluded while computing disallowance under section 40(c); (ii) Whether excise duty incentive was includible for computing relief under section 80HH.
Issue (i): Whether expenditure incurred by the assessee on maintenance of a building owned by it and used by the Managing Director as residence was to be excluded while computing disallowance under section 40(c).
Analysis: The question was governed by the principle that business expenditure incurred on maintenance of a building used as residence does not constitute a perquisite for the purpose of section 40(c). The relevant assessment year was 1986-87, and the prior binding view supporting the assessee was applied.
Conclusion: The issue was answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
Issue (ii): Whether excise duty incentive was includible for computing relief under section 80HH.
Analysis: The issue was decided by applying the settled view that excise duty incentive does not qualify for deduction while computing relief under section 80HH.
Conclusion: The issue was answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The reference succeeded on the first question and failed on the second, resulting in a mixed outcome.
Ratio Decidendi: Expenditure on maintenance of residential premises used by a managing director is not treated as a perquisite under section 40(c), whereas excise duty incentive is not eligible for deduction under section 80HH.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
