9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mployees?" - Clause (iv) of section 32(1) - As rightly held by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the expression "solely" in the above clause indicates that such buildings should be occupied by employees drawing a salary of Rs. 10,000 per annum or less. The assessee-company, it was held, did not fulfil this condition - In view of the conclusion as above of the final fact-finding authority, we are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee was not entitled for initial depreciation under section 32(1)(iv) of the Income-tax Act with respect to the quarters to the employees?" After having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, we are of the view that the question requires to be answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. For the said purpose, reference to a few facts as notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention of the assessee-appellant before the learned Tribunal was that some of the employees who are drawing less than Rs. 10,000 per annum are also staying in the quarters. The learned Tribunal has noticed in its order that it was conceded before it that no details of such employees could be furnished. The only contention therefore, was that the provision being a staff welfare measure, a taxp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upees or less ..." As rightly held by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the expression "solely" in the above clause indicates that such buildings should be occupied by employees drawing a salary of Rs. 10,000 per annum or less. The assessee-company, it was held, did not fulfil this condition. In view of the conclusion as above of the final fact-finding authority, we are inclined to uphold the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
