78 (Del) Usha Martin Industries Ltd. V. ACIT (2004) 086 TTJ 0574 (KOL) Nestle India Ltd. v. ACIT

59 ITD 353Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1996#634 most cited

What is 78 (Del) Usha Martin Industries Ltd. V. ACIT (2004) 086 TTJ 0574 (KOL) Nestle India Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

An assessee's bona fide estimate of employee salary, when valuing perquisites like residential accommodation, can be accepted if the department only brings contrary information to their notice during assessment proceedings.

155

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. ACIT · Nestle India Ltd. v. ACIT · Indian Airlines Ltd. v ACIT · bona fide estimate · perquisites · residential accommodation · employee salary valuation

Judgments citing 78 (Del) Usha Martin Industries Ltd. V. ACIT (2004) 086 TTJ 0574 (KOL) Nestle India Ltd. v. ACIT

S.B.I Rbo III (Admin Office), Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 76/LKW/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…T) • Associated Cements Co. Ltd. (74ITD 369) (Mumbai ITAT). • Mahindra & Mahindra (ITA No. 9869 to 9871 /Bom/69) (Mumbai ITAT). • CIT v. Nestle India Ltd. (61 ITD 444) (Delhi ITAT) • G.D. Goenka Public School (117 ITD 101) (Delhi ITAT) • Indian Airlines Ltd. (59 ITD 353) (Mumbai ITAT). • Eicher Goodearth Ltd. (ITA 1305/Del/1991) (Delhi ITAT). • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (62 TTJ 268) (Delhi ITAT). 38. It is reiterated that it was the bonafide belief of the Bank that it was not liable to deduct tax at source in respect of LTC provided to employees. In other words, the Bank had deducted appropriate tax at source on…

State Bank of India, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer(TDS)-II, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 305/LKW/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…T) • Associated Cements Co. Ltd. (74ITD 369) (Mumbai ITAT). • Mahindra & Mahindra (ITA No. 9869 to 9871 /Bom/69) (Mumbai ITAT). • CIT v. Nestle India Ltd. (61 ITD 444) (Delhi ITAT) • G.D. Goenka Public School (117 ITD 101) (Delhi ITAT) • Indian Airlines Ltd. (59 ITD 353) (Mumbai ITAT). • Eicher Goodearth Ltd. (ITA 1305/Del/1991) (Delhi ITAT). • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (62 TTJ 268) (Delhi ITAT). 38. It is reiterated that it was the bonafide belief of the Bank that it was not liable to deduct tax at source in respect of LTC provided to employees. In other words, the Bank had deducted appropriate tax at source on…

State Bank of India, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer(TDS)-II, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 304/LKW/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…T) • Associated Cements Co. Ltd. (74ITD 369) (Mumbai ITAT). • Mahindra & Mahindra (ITA No. 9869 to 9871 /Bom/69) (Mumbai ITAT). • CIT v. Nestle India Ltd. (61 ITD 444) (Delhi ITAT) • G.D. Goenka Public School (117 ITD 101) (Delhi ITAT) • Indian Airlines Ltd. (59 ITD 353) (Mumbai ITAT). • Eicher Goodearth Ltd. (ITA 1305/Del/1991) (Delhi ITAT). • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (62 TTJ 268) (Delhi ITAT). 38. It is reiterated that it was the bonafide belief of the Bank that it was not liable to deduct tax at source in respect of LTC provided to employees. In other words, the Bank had deducted appropriate tax at source on…

State Bank of India, Fund Settlement Office, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)-II, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 22/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…T) • Associated Cements Co. Ltd. (74ITD 369) (Mumbai ITAT). • Mahindra & Mahindra (ITA No. 9869 to 9871 /Bom/69) (Mumbai ITAT). • CIT v. Nestle India Ltd. (61 ITD 444) (Delhi ITAT) • G.D. Goenka Public School (117 ITD 101) (Delhi ITAT) • Indian Airlines Ltd. (59 ITD 353) (Mumbai ITAT). • Eicher Goodearth Ltd. (ITA 1305/Del/1991) (Delhi ITAT). • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (62 TTJ 268) (Delhi ITAT). 38. It is reiterated that it was the bonafide belief of the Bank that it was not liable to deduct tax at source in respect of LTC provided to employees. In other words, the Bank had deducted appropriate tax at source on…

State Bank of India - Cuffe Parade Branch, Mumbai vs. ACIT-TDS-3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1717/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2021AY 2012-13
Section 10(5)Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…T) • Associated Cements Co. Ltd. (74ITD 369) (Mumbai ITAT). • Mahindra & Mahindra (ITA No. 9869 to 9871 /Bom/69) (Mumbai ITAT). • CIT v. Nestle India Ltd. (61 ITD 444) (Delhi ITAT) • G.D. Goenka Public School (117 ITD 101) (Delhi ITAT) • Indian Airlines Ltd. (59 ITD 353) (Mumbai ITAT). • Eicher Goodearth Ltd. (ITA 1305/Del/1991) (Delhi ITAT). • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (62 TTJ 268) (Delhi ITAT). 38. It is reiterated that it was the bonafide belief of the Bank that it was not liable to deduct tax at source in respect of LTC provided to employees. In other words, the Bank had deducted appropriate tax at source on t…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 566/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 565/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 564/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 563/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 562/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 561/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 560/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 559/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 558/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer, (TDS)- Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 557/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 556/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chitradurga vs. The Income Tax Officer, (TDS) Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 555/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Haveri vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 554/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Haveri vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 553/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…

M/S. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Haveri vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS) - Ward, Davangere

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 552/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

…) 14 Taxman 99 (MP) • ITO v G. D. Goenka Public School (No. 2) (2008) 23 SOT 77 (Delhi) • Usha Martin Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 86 TTJ 574 (Kol.) • Nestle India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 444 (Delhi) • Indian Airlines Ltd. v Asstt. CIT (1996) 59 ITD 353 (Mum). 6.3.7. Further we note that, assessee relied on letter issued by CBDT dated 20/05/2002 granting exemption, placed at page 219 of paperbook. It is very clear from the letter that CBDT clearly understood the Cash Medical Benefit, to be in the nature of fixed medical allowance, and that, the fixed medical allowance is for the expenditure, whic…