TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isallowance of Rs. 12,000 as standard deduction under s. 16(i). The learned authorised representative of the assessee contended that this ground is covered in earlier years' order of the learned CIT(A) who has allowed the same for asst. yr. 1989-90. The learned authorised representative has for this purpose referred to p. 12 of the assessee's paper-book. As against this the learned Departmental Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 2 disputes the addition of Rs. 4,000 on account of car perquisites and Rs. 5,400 on account of telephone perquisite, thus aggregating to Rs. 9,400. The learned authorised representative of the assessee has contended that the agreement between the assessee and the company does not provide any personal use of the car and telephone and for this he has referred to part-C, on p. 17 of the paper-boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or personal user which was restricted to Rs. 5,000 by CIT(A). He has also submitted that this amount of disallowance of Rs. 5,000 has not been received by the company from the assessee employee during this year, though in subsequent years, the company has charged the employee for the amount of personal user of telephone. He has also contended that in other director's case, the CIT(A) has deleted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we find the settled position of law to be that a facility availed of by an employee can fall within the ambit of perquisite only when it is authorised by the employer to be so used for personal use by the employee, and not otherwise. If, however, the facilities are being used by the employee in an authorised manner, the same will not constitute a perquisite within the hands of the employee. This i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lity for personal use to the employee-assessee. As such there being no material/evidence on record supportive of the personal user of car and telephone by the assessee-employee put by way of an authorised right, we find no justification for adding of the value of the same as perquisites in the hands of the assessee. We, therefore, delete the above addition. 7. Ground No. 3 pertains to the levy o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
