Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2011 (5) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2011 (5) TMI 639 - HC - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of prize money from a TV game show.
2. Application of Section 115BB and Explanation (ii) to Section 2(24)(ix) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
3. Refund of advance tax paid under threat and coercion.
4. Jurisdiction and propriety of the Assessing Officer's actions.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Taxability of Prize Money from a TV Game Show:
The petitioner received a prize of Rs. 25 lakhs from a TV game show, which the Assessing Officer taxed under Section 115BB of the Income-tax Act. The petitioner contested this, arguing that the amendment to Section 2(24)(ix) introducing Explanation (ii) came into effect from April 1, 2002, and should not apply retrospectively to her prize received on November 5, 2000. The Tribunal agreed with the petitioner, holding that the prize money could not be taxed for the assessment year 2001-02 as the amendment had prospective operation.

2. Application of Section 115BB and Explanation (ii) to Section 2(24)(ix) of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) initially held that the prize money was taxable under "Income from other sources" and directed the Assessing Officer to reassess the quantum of income. The Tribunal, however, overturned this, stating that the prize money received before April 1, 2002, could not be taxed under Section 115BB due to the prospective nature of the amendment. This decision was not challenged further by the Revenue, thus attaining finality.

3. Refund of Advance Tax Paid Under Threat and Coercion:
The petitioner paid Rs. 7,55,550 as advance tax under threat of prosecution and penalties from the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal's order, which became final, implied that the prize money was not taxable, entitling the petitioner to a refund of the advance tax. Despite this, the Assessing Officer only refunded Rs. 2,12,763, which the petitioner argued was incorrect and sought a full refund with interest.

4. Jurisdiction and Propriety of the Assessing Officer's Actions:
The Assessing Officer, while giving effect to the Tribunal's order, included part of the prize money in the revised total income of Rs. 16,21,630, contrary to the Tribunal's decision. The court held that the Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction and showed disregard for the Tribunal's binding order. The court emphasized that Revenue officers must adhere to the decisions of higher appellate authorities to avoid undue harassment to assessees and maintain judicial discipline.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the Assessing Officer's order determining the income at Rs. 16,21,630 and directed a refund of the entire advance tax of Rs. 7,55,550 along with interest as provided under the Act. The court also criticized the Revenue authorities for their coercive tactics and stressed the need for fair and legal conduct in tax administration. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were ordered.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates