« Top Headlines » Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs  Mock Test Papers Series - I & II for Students appearing in CA Foundation January 2027 Examination.  Income Tax Rules 2026: CBDT Introduces Revised Form 161 for Penalty Waiver, Clarifies Misreporting Categories and Taxpayer Relief  ITR Filing and Income Tax Audit Deadline Extended: 5 Critical Things Taxpayers Must Know  Filing Belated ITR for AY 2026-27? Know Which Losses You Can Carry Forward and Which You May Lose  CBDT Extends Tax Audit Report Deadline to October 21, ITR Filing Last Date to November 21 for AY 2026-27  CBDT Extends AY 2026-27 ITR Filing Deadline for Tax-Audit Cases: New Dates and Key Compliance Details  Foreign Assets Missing From Your ITR? Income Tax Department Opens One-Time Disclosure Window  Tax Audit Deadline September 30: Why AIS, TDS and GST Figures May Not Match Your ITR and What Taxpayers Should Do  Tax audit deadline September 30: Common mistakes taxpayers should avoid  Your ITR says ‘verified’, but the refund hasn’t arrived? 5 reasons why your money could be stuck  Missed the ITR Deadline but TDS Refund Is Due? Here’s How You Can Still Claim Your Money «  Advance tax collection to be higher in Q2... Repair services too under scanner... » Apex court nod to new perquisites tax computation September, 19th 2006 The Supreme Court has upheld the new method of computation of perquisites in the matter of rental accommodation provided by companies to their employees. The new mode of computation was introduced by amending Rule 3 of the Income-Tax Rules, 1962, in 2001. Some executives of Tisco had challenged the new method as arbitrary and discriminatory. The Jharkhand and Kolkata high courts had dismissed such challenges earlier. The executives moved appeals in the Supreme Court, which were dismissed by a Bench headed by Chief Justice YK Sabharwal. The governments stand was that the tax authorities were finding it difficult to determine fair market value of the property as the earlier method was cumbersome. It did not take into account the high rent in the metros. These issues were subject to litigation in various courts and the amendment was meant to obviate these difficulties, it said. The government further said the valuation of perks relating to accommodation for private as well as public sector employees should be 10 per cent or 7.5 per cent of the salary. Providing accommodation at less than that would be deemed to be concession, it said. This was decided in keeping with the recommendation of the expert group constituted to rationalise income-tax laws. It was a policy decision in which the court should not interfere, the government argued. The Supreme Court, while upholding the new rule, partly allowed the appeals and granted some relief to the executives. It said it was open to the assessee to contend that there was no concession in the matter of accommodation provided by the company.