<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (6) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209950</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the tax paid by the employer on behalf of employees is considered part of the &quot;salary&quot; for computing perquisites, specifically rent-free accommodation. The Assessing Officer was deemed competent to rectify the order under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, as the inclusion of tax in the salary was a settled issue. The appeals were dismissed, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2013 16:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183389" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209950</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the tax paid by the employer on behalf of employees is considered part of the &quot;salary&quot; for computing perquisites, specifically rent-free accommodation. The Assessing Officer was deemed competent to rectify the order under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, as the inclusion of tax in the salary was a settled issue. The appeals were dismissed, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>