9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also grossed up tax liability, applying the provisions of 195A – ITAT deleted the addition of non monetary benefit - Insofar as grossing up is concerned the ITAT held that the AO had not given any finding to the effect that the tax on monetary benefits/salary was paid by the employer and, therefore, such grossing up of the tax was not sustainable – held that - Since the finding of fact is arrived ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reign currency. Tax in the sum of Rs.1,68,104/- was also paid by his employer. 2. While framing the assessment the Assessing Officer (AO) added the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,68,104/- treating it to be a monetary perk. In this manner, the figure of gross total income was arrived at Rs.51,56,849/- and after giving standard deduction of Rs.20,000/- the total income was arrived at Rs.51,36,849/-. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Revenue went in appeal against the order of the CIT (Appeal). The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has sustained the deletion of Rs.1,68,104/- treating it to be a non-monetary benefit. For arriving at this conclusion it relied upon the judgment of a Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of RBF Rig Corporation LIC. Insofar as grossing up is concerned the ITAT held that the AO had not give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty under Section 195A, the AO did not furnish any reason. He has not even stated as to what is other amount of tax paid by the employer on the basis of which grossing up was done under the said provision. In the appeal filed by the Assessee this grossing up was challenged on the ground that this was done on the basis of advance tax paid i.e. on the presumption that such an advance tax was paid by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
