SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(Kar) 393

S.B.MAJMUDAR, K.B.NAVADGI
P. Krishna Murthy – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. R.B. Guttal, for the Appellant
Mr. S.V. Seshachala, H.L. Dattu, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

S.B. Majmudar, C.J.—In this writ petition, the petitioner-assesses has brought in challenge the refusal of the assessing authority to grant him exemption from computing taxable income of an amount of Rs. 3,556 being interest subsidy. The assessing authority took the view that as a welfare measure, the company reimbursed the interest paid in excess of the Central Government Employees House Building Advance Rates and the interest reimbursed is assessable to tax under section 17(2)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), since the assessee would have paid even if the employer had not reimbursed it. It was further held that the Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, has clarified that the interest subsidy is not taxable when the employer borrows money and in turn advances it to its employees. It was also further held that since the assessee directly borrowed loan from the HDFC, his claim for exemption could not be considered and the interest subsidy reimbursed is assessable under the head "Salary"; and, therefore, Rs. 3,556 was added to the returned income for computation of tax. The assessee moved the matter before the revisional authority, wh











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top