https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415442 Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules was treated as governing fringe benefit valuation for a tea company under Chapter XII-H, because tea income is subject to a statutory composite computation that splits business and agricultural income on a proportionate basis. The Court applied the existing legal fiction under Rule 8 and held that expenditure forming part of the composite business outgoings, including fringe benefit-related expenditure, must also be apportioned accordingly. This approach ensured that the agricultural-income component was not brought to tax indirectly through fringe benefit valuation. en-us Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Dec 2021 09:36:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415442 Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules was treated as governing fringe benefit valuation for a tea company under Chapter XII-H, because tea income is subject to a statutory composite computation that splits business and agricultural income on a proportionate basis. The Court applied the existing legal fiction under Rule 8 and held that expenditure forming part of the composite business outgoings, including fringe benefit-related expenditure, must also be apportioned accordingly. This approach ensured that the agricultural-income component was not brought to tax indirectly through fringe benefit valuation. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415442