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

1993 Supreme(Cal) 374

RUMA PAL
INDIAN BANK OFFICERS ASSOCIATION – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN BANK – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
FAZLUL HAQUE, JAYANTA BHATTACHARYA, NANDALAL PAL, P.K.MALICK, R.K.Murarka, RUPAN MITRA

RUMA PAL, J.

( 1 ) TWO questions arise for determination in this case :" (1) Whether accommodation provided by a nationalised bank for which rent is fixed under the Regulations of the bank is a perquisite within the meaning of Section 15 read with Section 17 (1) (iv) and Section 17 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (referred to as 'the Act') ? (2) Whether the demand for tax treating such accommodation as perquisites could be made retrospectively ?"

( 2 ) THE petitioners are employees of the Indian Bank. The Indian Bank is a nationalised bank and is governed by the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 19 read with Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the board of directors of the Indian Bank in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India and with the previous sanction of the Central Government made the Indian Bank (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979 (referred to as "the Regulations" ). In terms of the Regulations, the standard rent in respect of accommodation owned by the bank and given to the employee for occupat











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