ITAT Bangalore Grants Medical Benefits to LIC Under Section 192

In the particular act providing benefits to the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore bench the organization does not need to cut the tax with respect to the cash payment of cash medical advantage to its employees similar is in the fact of mere compensation outside the confines of section 192 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 “Get to know complete guide of TDS provisions under income tax act 1961 at here. Also, we include several topics as TDS returns, TDS due dates, penalt. Read more. As per the 2 member bench, the law did not declare the need to deduct the TDS in case of cash medical advantage and thus permitted the LIC appeal.

Prior to that, the assessing officer see that beneath section 192 the taxpayer has not cut down the TDS with respect to the cash medical advantages furnished to the employees the payment furnished to Chinnu Graphics, payment to Kulkarni Services, payments to Sodexo SVC India Pvt.Ltd., return furnished to HP India Sales Pvt.Ltd., and EMDC Projects. Beneath section 10 of the cash medical advantage, the cash medical advantage furnished to the employees was considered as privileged concerning the cash medical benefits. It is seen that the amount received as the fixed allowance is to be taxed in the employee’s hands as a measure of benefit.

The officials seek that the amount furnished as medical advantages comes within the definition provided below section 17 (2) (iv) Proviso (v) of the Act. Section 192(1) of the Act takes obligation on the part of the individual who is responsible to pay the income which is charged beneath the head salaries to tax deduct at source (TDS) during the payment time.

Section 192 of the act shows that the individual subjected to furnish the income payable below the head salaries will be entitled to deduct tax at the source during the payment time on the measured value. The objects are liable to get payable under tax below the head income from salaries which are put down for sections 15 to 17 of the act.

“Though section 192(2D) was inserted by Finance Act 2015, Rule 26 does not specify the requirement to deduct TDS in case of Cash Medical Benefit,” “In this situation, the stand of the assessee that the Cash medical benefit was the only reimbursement of the expenditure incurred by the employees, and as such, they could not form part of their income, could not be said to be without any basis. Therefore, the belief of the assessee on that point was bona fide. Since the estimate made by the assessee has been held, to be honest and bona fide, the assessee could not be treated as “assessee in default,”