1985 (2) TMI 62

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (' the Act '). 2. Two of the employees of the assessee-company, viz., Shri T.T. Jagannathan and R. Rajagopalachari were in receipt of a total remuneration of Rs. 1,11,686 and Rs. 86,350, respectively. The IAC restricted the amount allowable under section 40A(5) to Rs. 72,000 in each case and disallowed the balance of Rs. 39,686 and Rs. 14,350, respectively, ag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The remaining payments, it was contended, were towards statutory obligations and as such cannot be considered as ' perquisite ' for the purposes of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that section 40(c) of the Act applied. For the purposes of section 40(c), what is relevant is any expenditure which has resulted directly or indirectly in the provision of any remuneration or benefit or amenity....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e is in appeal. 3. The arguments advanced before the Commissioner (Appeals) were repeated before us. The learned departmental representative's argument was that since section 40(c) was applicable, the decision given by the Commissioner (Appeals) was basically correct. 4. The main question to be considered in this case is whether section 40(c) is to be applied in this case to the entire exclu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Mysore Commercial Union Ltd. The payment of premium towards personal accident insurance of Shri T.T. Jagannathan cannot also be called a ' perquisite ' for there is no benefit to the employee. The benefit, if any, arises in the case of an accident. It is only a contingent interest. Therefore, this sum also has to be excluded from the purview of section 40....