https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2993 The Full Bench, following the Supreme Court's precedent in Arun Kumar v. Union of India [2006] 286 ITR 89, upheld the validity of rule 3 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The court found that the rule was not discriminatory or arbitrary and did not violate article 14 of the Constitution. The Full Bench directed the authorities to address any other claims of the petitioners regarding perquisites based on the principles established in the Supreme Court's judgment, emphasizing the absence of a 'deeming fiction' related to concession in rent under section 17(2)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. en-us Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2993 The Full Bench, following the Supreme Court's precedent in Arun Kumar v. Union of India [2006] 286 ITR 89, upheld the validity of rule 3 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The court found that the rule was not discriminatory or arbitrary and did not violate article 14 of the Constitution. The Full Bench directed the authorities to address any other claims of the petitioners regarding perquisites based on the principles established in the Supreme Court's judgment, emphasizing the absence of a 'deeming fiction' related to concession in rent under section 17(2)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2993