perquisite-sec.17(2)

The benefits from an accident cover are different from that of life insurance cover. Under the logic that the employee stands to benefit from this payment, I should think it is a perquisite.

According to me following points should be consider for above query,
> it is true that LIC of employees of is different from accidental insurance of employees so provision regarding accidental group insurence should not applied to LIC.
> generally employer taken accidental insurance instance of LIC of employees, since he allowed deducation which is benefit for employer as well as business.
> whan LIC premium of employees paid by employer, it is oblication of employees paid by employer, which is perquisite u/s 17(2)(III) .
>

Thanks for the views.In CIT v Lala Shri Dhar (1972)84 ITR 192(Delhi)though it pertains to per.accident insurance but principal settled is that (i)when employer himself takes out the policy on his own initiative to protect the interest of employees(i.e proposal forms etc are signed by employer) and (ii) when no immediate benefit accrues to employees and the benefit is contingent on fulfilling of certain conditions and (iii) the employee had not voluntarily taken out the policy and employee was not obliged to pay premium if employer had stopped paying it.Till the date when policy is assigned by employer in favour of employee all benefir will accrue to employe.In case of death before assignment ,maturity proceeds will go to employer.
The above grounds also holds true in case of life insuranc premium paid by employer under"employer-employee" scheme of LIC of India.Pl.give your opinion.
What would happen when policy is assigned after 3 to 5 yrs?