<?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>1990 (3) TMI 365 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182060</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the exemption of the value of rent-free accommodation provided to the assessee by his employer under s. 10(14) of the IT Act. The Court found that the assessee was in India for work related to a specific assignment, and the accommodation did not confer a personal advantage. Relying on a similar precedent, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming the decision of the Tribunal and CIT(A) that the rent-free accommodation qualified for exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2016 18:19:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426220" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (3) TMI 365 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182060</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the exemption of the value of rent-free accommodation provided to the assessee by his employer under s. 10(14) of the IT Act. The Court found that the assessee was in India for work related to a specific assignment, and the accommodation did not confer a personal advantage. Relying on a similar precedent, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming the decision of the Tribunal and CIT(A) that the rent-free accommodation qualified for exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>