Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune)
ITAT Pune Deletes Perquisite Additions on Director’s Rent-Free Accommodation – Double Addition Found Unjustified- Statement Given in Survey Cannot Substitute Evidence; Statement Alone Cannot Justify Perquisite Addition When Contradicted by Evidence; ITAT Voids Addition Based on Erroneous Survey Admission
Pune ITAT allowed a group of appeals filed by Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam, his family members, & co-directors of BSA Corporation Ltd., deleting additions made towards perquisite value of rent-free accommodation allegedly enjoyed by them. The additions had been made solely on the basis of statements recorded during a survey u/s 133A, without any corroborative evidence.
AO, relying on the statement of Shri Balasaheb V. Kadam, had added ₹5.94 lakh per year as perquisite value of rent-free accommodation, holding that company-owned guesthouses at Amanora & Castle Royale were used by directors for personal residence. Similar additions were made across different assessment years for all three family members. CIT(A) upheld the additions as well as the reopening u/s 147, observing that the statement under oath was binding.
Before the Tribunal, Assessees contended that the disclosure was made under duress, without verification of the salary structure, & that the perquisite value of ₹5.94 lakh was already included in the salary reflected in the company’s records & offered to tax in the returns. AO’s approach, they argued, resulted in double taxation of the same amount.
