https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58538 The case involved issues related to disallowance under section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding repairs and maintenance expenses of flats used by officers, interpretation of ownership of assets by the company and leased assets, and determination of perquisite value under rule 3 of the Income-tax Rules. The Tribunal held that section 40A(5) does not necessitate company ownership of the building, expenses on flats should be considered as perquisites, and expenditure on assets used by employees must be considered under section 40A(5. The Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision was reversed, and the ITO's order was restored. en-us Fri, 18 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Dec 2010 15:11:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58538 The case involved issues related to disallowance under section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding repairs and maintenance expenses of flats used by officers, interpretation of ownership of assets by the company and leased assets, and determination of perquisite value under rule 3 of the Income-tax Rules. The Tribunal held that section 40A(5) does not necessitate company ownership of the building, expenses on flats should be considered as perquisites, and expenditure on assets used by employees must be considered under section 40A(5. The Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision was reversed, and the ITO's order was restored. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58538