CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1)

86 ITR 817Reported decision1972#25761 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2013.

Judgments citing CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1)

Yoshio Kubo vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA-441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…that the definition of the word "salary" contained in r. 3 does not include tax paid by the employer in the present case. We are fortified in the view we are taking by two decisions viz., one of the Kerala High Court in CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1) [1972] 86 ITR 817, and the other of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Mackintosh [1975] 99 ITR 419. In both the cases, the very same question fell for consideration, viz., whether the income-tax paid by the employer was salary for the purposes of finding out the value of the rent-free accommodation given to the employee. Both the courts have answered the issue…

Yoshio Kubo vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 441 / 2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…that the definition of the word "salary" contained in r. 3 does not include tax paid by the employer in the present case. We are fortified in the view we are taking by two decisions viz., one of the Kerala High Court in CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1) [1972] 86 ITR 817, and the other of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Mackintosh [1975] 99 ITR 419. In both the cases, the very same question fell for consideration, viz., whether the income-tax paid by the employer was salary for the purposes of finding out the value of the rent-free accommodation given to the employee. Both the courts have answered the issue…

Yoshio Kubo vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…that the definition of the word "salary" contained in r. 3 does not include tax paid by the employer in the present case. We are fortified in the view we are taking by two decisions viz., one of the Kerala High Court in CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1) [1972] 86 ITR 817, and the other of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Mackintosh [1975] 99 ITR 419. In both the cases, the very same question fell for consideration, viz., whether the income-tax paid by the employer was salary for the purposes of finding out the value of the rent-free accommodation given to the employee. Both the courts have answered the issue…

CIT v. C. W. Steel (No. 1) (86 ITR 817) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax