This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Reimbursement of medical expense is not perquisite u/s 17(2)
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Rajkamal R. Bajaj v/s ADDL. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2008-09
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Mumbai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
CA Prarthana Jalan
Hon’ble Mumbai ITAT has in the case of Mr. Rajkamal R. Bajaj v/s ACIT has held that Reimbursement of a medical expense is not perquisite u/s 17(2) of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that The assessee received a sum of Rs.90,090/- towards reimbursement of medical expenses from the company M/s Bajaj Consultants Pvt. Ltd., wherein, he is a Director and claimed the same as exempt u/s 17(2) of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer in view of section 17(2)(vi) brought to tax by treating it as perquisite under the head income from salary and taxed accordingly.
The Ld CIT(...
Author Info
Is it applies for salaried employees. Because the specified case is applicable for director, is not an employee.. clarify
please tell me the treatment of Medical Allowance received by employee, whether it is exempt if yes then upto what extent, and whether employee required to furnished bill???