Commissioner of Income Tax v. J.G. Keswani

202 ITR 391High Court1993#17230 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(10CC)Section 15Section 17(2)(v)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 17(2)section 17section 10salarysection 15personindiatotal income

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. J.G. Keswani

RAJKUMAR PAVANKUMAR SHARMA,MAKARPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(7), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1821/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar Goyal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 147Section 17(2)(v)

…ld that section 17(2)(v) of the Act clearly includes within the definition of perquisite any sum payable by the employer to effect a contract for annuity. The CIT(Appeals), relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Patna High Court in CIT v. J.G. Keshwani [1993] 202 ITR 391, held that the amount paid by the employer for purchase of annuity policy was taxable as salary in the hands of the employee irrespective of whether the benefit accrued in the year or not. The CIT(Appeals) distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in L.W. Russel on the ground that it was rendered in the context of the 1922 Act and c…

BISWAS MANIK,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 133(6)Section 17Section 17(2)(v)

…llaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), to effect an assurance on the life of the assessee or to effect a contract for an annuity;" 6.6 In this context, reference is also drawn to a judgement of Patna High Court in the case of CIT Vs. J.G. Keshwani [1993] 202 ITR 391 (Patna). In this case, it was Biswas Manik vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4– held that amounts spent by the company to purchase deferred annuity policies from LIC on the life of the director, was assessable as salary in the hands of the director under section 15 r.w. sections 17(1)(iv) and 17(2)(v) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 6.7 In view of the ab…

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA-441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…e benefits in fact inured or vested in them immediately even though the occasion or event for their enjoyment was postponed. 31. The revenue relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v J.G. Keswani (202 ITR 391), where after noticing L.W. Russel the High Court held that in view of the new provisions, the observations of the Supreme Court and the observations regarding annuity policies not vesting any advantage that fell within the definition of ―perquisites‖ was held to be inapplicable, in the following terms: “Therefore, their Lordships have held…

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 441 / 2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…e benefits in fact inured or vested in them immediately even though the occasion or event for their enjoyment was postponed. 31. The revenue relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v J.G. Keswani (202 ITR 391), where after noticing L.W. Russel the High Court held that in view of the new provisions, the observations of the Supreme Court and the observations regarding annuity policies not vesting any advantage that fell within the definition of ―perquisites‖ was held to be inapplicable, in the following terms: “Therefore, their Lordships have held…

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

…e benefits in fact inured or vested in them immediately even though the occasion or event for their enjoyment was postponed. 31. The revenue relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v J.G. Keswani (202 ITR 391), where after noticing L.W. Russel the High Court held that in view of the new provisions, the observations of the Supreme Court and the observations regarding annuity policies not vesting any advantage that fell within the definition of ―perquisites‖ was held to be inapplicable, in the following terms: “Therefore, their Lordships have held…

Commissioner of Income Tax v. J.G. Keswani (202 ITR 391) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax