9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (3) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for expenses incidental to employment under s. 16 of the IT Act. During the asst. yr. 1977-78, the assessee received the following amounts of salaries from three employers: (1) M/s Deora PU Cabncon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. Rs. 19,800 (2) M/s Skyline Industries (P) Ltd. Rs. 16,500 (3) M/s Trafico & Croslite (P) Ltd. Rs. 12,000 In the asst. yr. 1980-81, salary was received form two employers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntion that standard deduction has to be allowed separately for each salary subject to the maximum limit provided under s. 16, is acceptable. There is no doubt that a person can be an employee of several persons and thus receive salary from more sources than one. The entire income from salaries is grouped together and assessed under one head. Sec. 16 provides for a standard deduction in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was justified in claiming separate standard deductions for each source of salary income. Similar view was taken by another Bench in XYZ vs. ITO (1981) 12 TTJ (Bom) 194. In both these cases, it was also held that an assessee can claim the maximum deduction in respect of separate employments, i.e. the standard deduction actually allowed could even be beyond Rs. 3,500, although it could not be more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee was entitled to a deduction of Rs. 3,500 as standard deduction for expenses incidental to employment instead of Rs. 1000 as allowed by the ITO and we allow deduction of Rs. 3,500 thereby giving the assessee a relief of Rs. 2,500. 4. For the asst. yr. 1980-81, the assessee received Rs. 12,000 as salary from Trafico & Croslite (P) Ltd. and, therefore, he was entitled to Rs. 2,400 as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
