Hi folks, i would like to add a point here. I have not referred this in the book, but by simple logic we can argue that insurance is not something without which a car would not run. Expenses for REPAIRS, RUNNING and MAINTENANCE are liable for FBT.
Can insurance of a car be called maintenance?
Yes I agree to the point that if insurance of the car, which belongs to the employee, is paid by the employer can attract FBT because it will be an expenditure of the employee borne by the employer.
But if the car belongs to the employer, according to me, cannot be chargeable to FBT.
Law has simply written " repairs, running (including fuel) maintenance of motor cars and the amount of depriciation thereon"
Interpretetion might be different for different users.
I have told my opinion. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you