TMI Blog1982 (10) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was the book value as per the books of account of the company and an air-conditioner at Rs. 2,464 which also represented the company's book value. The ITO was of the view that the price was understated to the extent of Rs. 10,000 in the case of car and Rs. 1,000 in the case of air-conditioner and made an addition of Rs. 11,000 as perquisite taxable in the assessee's hands. The AAC was of the view that the market value may not differ as high as Rs. 10,000. He was of the view that the market value of the car was only Rs. 10,000 and sustained the difference of Rs. 6,100 as the value of perquisite includible in the assessee's hands. He deleted the addition in respect of the air-conditioner. The assessee is not satisfied with the relief an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 8-8-1977. A decision of the Madras Bench of this Tribunal in respect of concessional loans in the case of D.D. Khavilkar v. ITO, reported at page 70 of Selected Orders of ITAT was relied upon for the purpose of showing that not all the benefits received by an employee from the employer would automatically be taxable under section 17. The learned departmental representative claimed that a plain reading of the definition of the word 'perquisite' would clearly make the benefit taxable. It was argued that it is too much to say that the assessee did not get any benefit in having the car at a price which is almost nominal. According to him, even the value adopted by the AAC was probably on the lower side. The benefit accrued to the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the estimate of Rs. 10,000 is in any manner excessive. However, the second part of the question is whether this difference between Rs. 10,000 which was the market value as estimated by the AAC and Rs. 3,900 at which the car was transferred to the assessee, is a benefit which can be taxed in the hands of the assessee. It is not as though the assessee was entitled to have the car at book value, according to the terms of the contract of employment. The employer was not bound to sell the car or any other goods to the assessee at book value. Even if it was offered at book value, the assessee was not bound to purchase the same. The purchase was as a result of an independent sale between the employer and the employee. Employment was not the causa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessional loans within the meaning of section 17(2)(iii). We understand that this decision has also since been accepted by the revenue, inasmuch as reference was not sought on this question by the Commissioner, though reference was sought on another issue decided in that case. The assessee has shown a letter wherein it is seen that the CBDT had no intention of taxing such a benefit (concessional loan) as a perquisite. In fact, the stand of the CBDT before the Public Accounts Committee in respect of the concessional loans was that the present law does not enable the Government to tax the same. This was seen from a report in The Hindu, dated 16-12-1980 and has been reproduced in the case of Khavilkar. We are of the view that the sale of artic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
