Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (6) TMI 386 - ITAT MUMBAIDetermination of perquisite value - Notional interest on deposit given by the employer with the landlord for securing the rented premises - whether is not to be treated as a perquisite? - Held that:- Admittedly, the assessee’s employer, i.e. M/s. Kotak Investment Advisors Ltd., had provided rent free accommodation to assessee for which it paid rent of ₹ 2,10,000/- and a deposit of ₹ 20,00,000/-. As per the records in Form No. 12BA, it was seen that the perquisite value of rent paid of ₹ 2,10,000/- was considered in the hands of the assessee. Respectfully following the decision of CIT vs. Shankar Krishnan (2011 (9) TMI 728 - Bombay High Court ), we hold that the contention of the authorities below that notional interest on the deposit paid by the employer to the landlord for securing accommodation while computing the perquisite value of the residential accommodation is to be included in the assessee’s income is not sustainable in view of the express words used in Rule 3 of the I.T. Rules, 1962 as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and accordingly direct the AO to delete the addition made in this regard. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|