<?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>1983 (8) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57940</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the housing loan provided by the employer at a concessional interest rate of 4% did not constitute a perquisite under section 17(2)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the loan was not a part of the remuneration for services rendered and did not provide a substantial benefit to be considered a perquisite. As a result, the addition of Rs. 1,136 to the assessee&#039;s income was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:27:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (8) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57940</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the housing loan provided by the employer at a concessional interest rate of 4% did not constitute a perquisite under section 17(2)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the loan was not a part of the remuneration for services rendered and did not provide a substantial benefit to be considered a perquisite. As a result, the addition of Rs. 1,136 to the assessee&#039;s income was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57940</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>