TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efit of the standard deduction in respect of the assessment for the assessment year 1977-78, is the question that arises for consideration in this reference made by the Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue. The assessee was a whole time executive director of Brakes India Limited. He was allowed the use of the car belonging to the company on condition that he paid a sum of Rs. 100 for any use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 16 of the Act deals with the deductions from salaries. Under section 16(i)(b), the maximum deduction allowable is Rs. 3,500, That amount is liable to be reduced to Rs. 1,000, if any one or more of the contingencies contemplated in clauses (i) to (iii) of the proviso to section 16(i) is attracted. Clause (ii) of the proviso deals with a case where any motor car, motor cycle, scooter or other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rising in this case mealy the use of a motor car by an assessee, such car having been provided by his employer, partly for the performance of his duties and partly for his private or personal purpose. The table under rule 3(C)(ii) statutorily provides that the value of perquisite by the employer is to be taken as Rs. 100. Admittedly, in this case the assessee had been permitted to use the vehicle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonal use and had collected a sum of Rs. 100 for such personal user. The vehicle had clearly been provided for personal use as also for official purpose. Learned counsel also referred to the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. A. R. Adaikappa Chettiar [1973] 91 ITR 90. The court held that the unauthorised user of the company's cars by the managing agents could not be regarded as a bene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hicle was provided for personal as also official use, and the vehicle had not been provided wholly and exclusively for official purpose. In the statement of the case, the Tribunal has tried to justify its order even after setting out the question referred. This is wholly improper. Our answer to the question that has been referred to us is, therefore, in the negative, in favour of the Revenue an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|