TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (5) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for opinion to this court "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the reimbursement of medical expenses to an employee being the director of the company, is not 'perquisite' within the meaning of section 17(2) (iii) (a) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ?" The present reference rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee even on humanitarian grounds and it was not obligatory on the part of the employer to bear such expenses. He, therefore, taxed the amount in question in the hands of the assessee by treating the same as a perquisite in terms of provisions of section 17(2) (iii) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, also confirmed during first appeal. 5 The Tribunal, however, on an appeal by the assessee took t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alary. Clause (iv) of sub-section (2) of section 17 of the Act which is to the following effect is included in the word "perquisite". "Any sum paid by the employer in respect of any obligation which, but for such payment, would have been payable by the assessee." 8 From the perusal of the aforesaid clause, it appears that in order to qualify the amount to be a perquisite, it is necessary that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....40A(5) (a) (ii) as well, i.e., in sub-clause (iv) of the definition of 'perquisite' in clause (b) of Explanation 2 to sub-section (5). What do they mean ? The said words contemplate a situation where the assessee makes a payment [in cash] in respect of an obligation—obligation of the employee—which would have been payable by the employee if it is not paid by the assessee. The payment by the as....