https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61333 The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal and cross-objection, upholding the CIT (A)'s decision to delete the addition of excess perquisites to the manager as it did not exceed the statutory limit. Additionally, the disallowance of perquisites to the Project Manager was found excessive and restricted. Guest house expenses were deleted by the CIT (A) but were partially allowed by the Tribunal for the period before a retrospective amendment to the IT Act. The Tribunal's decisions were in accordance with legal provisions and precedents cited during the proceedings. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:26:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61333 The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal and cross-objection, upholding the CIT (A)'s decision to delete the addition of excess perquisites to the manager as it did not exceed the statutory limit. Additionally, the disallowance of perquisites to the Project Manager was found excessive and restricted. Guest house expenses were deleted by the CIT (A) but were partially allowed by the Tribunal for the period before a retrospective amendment to the IT Act. The Tribunal's decisions were in accordance with legal provisions and precedents cited during the proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61333