2000 (11) TMI 1230 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of hotel accommodation as a perquisite.
2. Enhancement of perquisite value without opportunity to show cause.
3. Deduction u/s 10(6)(viia) for perquisite calculation.
4. Chargeability of interest u/s 234B.

Summary:

1. Taxability of Hotel Accommodation as a Perquisite:
The appellant, a Japanese Technician employed with Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. Ltd., was provided hotel accommodation by the employer. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated this as a perquisite u/s 17(2) of the I.T. Act, valuing it at 12.5% of the salary. The CIT(A) enhanced this valuation to 20% of the salary. The Tribunal held that the hotel accommodation provided at the project site is to be treated as a perquisite u/s 17(2) of the I.T. Act, and the valuation should be done according to the Income-tax Rules.

2. Enhancement of Perquisite Value Without Opportunity to Show Cause:
The appellant contended that the CIT(A) enhanced the perquisite value from Rs. 28,653 to Rs. 45,846 without giving an opportunity to show cause. The Tribunal did not specifically address this procedural issue but focused on the correct valuation method for the perquisite.

3. Deduction u/s 10(6)(viia) for Perquisite Calculation:
The appellant argued for a deduction of Rs. 48,000 u/s 10(6)(viia) from the salary for perquisite calculation. The Tribunal agreed that allowances exempt from tax should not form part of the salary for perquisite valuation as per Explanation 1 to Rule 3(a) of the I.T. Rules. Therefore, the deduction u/s 10(6)(viia) should be considered.

4. Chargeability of Interest u/s 234B:
The appellant argued that interest u/s 234B was not chargeable as tax was deductible at source from the salary. The Tribunal referred to section 209(1)(d) and Explanation 1 to section 234B, concluding that the authorities below were not justified in charging interest u/s 234B since the tax was indeed deducted at source. The appeal was partly allowed on this ground.