The Income-tax Act, 1961, has been instrumental in providing a comprehensive definition of ‘salary’ for taxation purposes, including not only the fixed components of remuneration but also various perquisites and fringe benefits received by employees. Among these, Section 17(2) plays a pivotal role by expanding the scope of taxable perquisites.
However, within this broad coverage, there are nuanced exemptions designed to balance equity, especially in cases of genuine financial or medical hardship. One such provision is sub-clause (b) of clause (ii) of the proviso to sub-clause (viii) of clause (2) of section 17, which provides a specific exemption for interest-free or concessional loans for medical treatment. This article dissects the provision in detail and elaborates on its implications for salaried taxpayers and employers.
Understanding the Legislative Framework
Section 17(2)(viii) – Perquisites
Section 17(2) defines ‘perquisite’ to include various benefits and amenities provided by an employer to an employee. Sub-clause (viii) broadly includes:
“The value of any other benefit or amenity, service, right or privilege provided by the employer, directly or indirectly, free of cost or at concessional rate to the employee…”
This essentially brings into the tax net any benefit that does not fall under the earlier sub-clauses — making it a residual clause.
Proviso to Section 17(2)(viii)
Recognizing the potential for hardship or necessity, the law provides specific exemptions under this proviso. One of the key exemptions relates to interest-free or concessional loans provided by employers.
Clause (ii) of the Proviso:
Clause (ii) deals with loans and exempts certain categories from being treated as perquisites, such as:
- Loans up to ₹20,000 in aggregate
- Loans for medical treatment as discussed below
Sub-clause (b) – The Key Provision:
“(b) where the loan is made available for medical treatment in respect of diseases specified in rule 3A, the amount of the loan to the extent it is not reimbursed to the employee under any medical insurance scheme shall not be considered a perquisite.”
What is Rule 3A? – The Reference to Specified Diseases
Rule 3A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 prescribes the method of calculating perquisite value for medical facilities, and also lists the eligible diseases for exemption purposes.
Diseases Specified under Rule 3A include:
- Cancer
- Tuberculosis
- AIDS (Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome)
- Thalassemia
- Hemophilia
- Chronic renal failure
- Parkinson’s disease
- Alzheimer’s disease
These are generally considered life-threatening or high-cost diseases, and thus attract relief in the form of tax exemption when concessional loans are provided for their treatment.
Conditions for Exemption
To qualify for the exemption under this clause, the following cumulative conditions must be met:
- Loan must be granted by the employer (not from third parties or institutions arranged by employer).
- Loan must be for medical treatment of the employee or any member of their household.
- Disease must be one of the specified illnesses listed in Rule 3A.
- Exemption is available only to the extent of unreimbursed amount — i.e., if the employee is reimbursed under any medical insurance scheme, that portion will not qualify.
Example:
If an employer grants an interest-free loan of ₹5 lakhs to an employee for cancer treatment and the employee receives ₹2 lakhs from their health insurer, then only ₹3 lakhs will be exempt from perquisite value.
Reference Link
For official reference and latest details on Form 26AS and TRACES-related services:
https://www.tdscpc.gov.in
Valuation Rules for Other Loans
It is important to contrast this exemption with the valuation mechanism for other concessional loans under Rule 3(7)(i) of the Income-tax Rules, which states:
The perquisite value is the difference between the interest charged by SBI on similar loans and the interest actually recovered by the employer.
Thus, unless the exemption under Rule 3A is attracted, the differential interest is treated as a taxable perquisite in the hands of the employee.
Judicial Precedents and Clarifications
While the CBDT has not issued many circulars specific to this sub-clause, general principles related to medical reimbursement and perquisite valuation have been clarified in:
- Circular No. 8/2005 – Clarified taxability of medical reimbursements under Rule 3A
- Circular No. 20/2015 – Regarding exemptions under Section 10 and rules under Section 17
- K.K. Choudhury v. CIT – Established the principle that exemptions must be strictly construed, especially when dependent on prescribed conditions
Practical Considerations for Employers and Employees
For Employers:
- Ensure proper documentation for loans sanctioned for medical purposes.
- Maintain separate records of medical insurance reimbursements.
- Report correctly in Form 12BA and Form 16.
- Avoid misclassification of perquisites in payroll processing software.
For Employees:
- Keep medical prescriptions, diagnosis reports, and treatment bills.
- Disclose medical insurance reimbursements honestly to avoid misreporting.
- Clarify eligibility before availing employer-sponsored loan for treatment.
Latest Updates and Budgetary Proposals
As of Finance Act, 2024, there has been no major amendment to this provision, but salaried employees should stay updated, especially in light of increasing health insurance coverage under group policies and rise in employer-provided wellness benefits.
However, with the growing digitisation and use of Form 12BB and Annual Information Statement (AIS), there is now increased scrutiny on mismatches in perquisite reporting, making compliance all the more important.
Conclusion
The exemption under sub-clause (b) of clause (ii) of the proviso to section 17(2)(viii) reflects the legislative intent to provide compassionate relief for genuine medical exigencies. For both employers and employees, careful adherence to the prescribed conditions ensures not only tax efficiency but also compliance with statutory obligations.
In a time where employee wellness is gaining prominence, such provisions play a vital role in incentivizing humane employment practices without resulting in unintended tax burdens.
Stox N Tax 
Leave a comment