https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14105 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee for all aspects under issue 1, holding that medical reimbursement, house rent allowance, personal accident insurance premium, and club fees should be treated as part of salary for disallowance under section 40A(5). The court also denied the deduction for excess travelling allowance under rule 6D, encompassing hotel expenses. Additionally, the court upheld the disallowance of depreciation amounting to Rs. 4,40,029 for the assessment year 1983-84, clarifying that the higher rate of depreciation introduced in 1983 did not apply to that assessment year. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:36:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14105 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee for all aspects under issue 1, holding that medical reimbursement, house rent allowance, personal accident insurance premium, and club fees should be treated as part of salary for disallowance under section 40A(5). The court also denied the deduction for excess travelling allowance under rule 6D, encompassing hotel expenses. Additionally, the court upheld the disallowance of depreciation amounting to Rs. 4,40,029 for the assessment year 1983-84, clarifying that the higher rate of depreciation introduced in 1983 did not apply to that assessment year. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14105