SC rules government-controlled body's housing not government accommodation under Section 17(2) and Rule 3 valuation The SC upheld the HC ruling that for computing the value of perquisites under section 17(2), residential accommodation provided by a government-controlled ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
SC rules government-controlled body's housing not government accommodation under Section 17(2) and Rule 3 valuation
The SC upheld the HC ruling that for computing the value of perquisites under section 17(2), residential accommodation provided by a government-controlled body does not qualify as accommodation provided by the Central or State Government. The Court clarified that merely being owned or controlled by the government does not equate such a body to the government itself. Consequently, the assessee, a Trust under the Charitable Endowment Act, cannot claim valuation benefits applicable to government-provided accommodation under Rule 3. The SC dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, affirming the lower courts' decisions.
The Supreme Court, consisting of HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B. V. NAGARATHNA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL, dismissed the Special Leave Petitions after hearing both the petitioner's and respondent's counsel, finding no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and orders. Pending applications were disposed of.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
