9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (6) TMI 107 - HC - Income TaxAmendment to section 2(24)(ix) has been made w.e.f. April 1, 2002 after amendment prize by draw of lots was treated as lottery admittedly the Assessment Year in instant case is 1997-98 and this amendment has been made with effect from 1.4.2002, hence amount distributed as prize by draw of lots did not form part of term lottery for the period prior to this amendment
Issues:
Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in deleting the tax levied by the Assessing Officer under sections 201(1) and 194B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The case involved a dispute regarding the taxation of amounts distributed as prizes through a draw of lots, with the question of whether such prizes constituted a part of a lottery as per the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's decision was based on the amendment to section 2(24)(ix) of the Act, which explicitly included winning prizes by draw of lots or chance within the definition of a lottery, effective from 1.4.2002. As the Assessment Year in question was 1997-98, prior to this amendment, the provisions of Section 2(24)(ix) and Section 194B were deemed inapplicable to the assessee's case. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on the prize distribution by draw of lots, leading to the deletion of the tax liability and interest. The Tribunal's decision was based on the specific timing of the amendment and the legislative intent behind the inclusion of draw of lots within the lottery definition. The appellant argued that the amendment treating prize by draw of lots as lottery was not in force during the relevant period of assessment, which led to the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee. The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's reasoning, emphasizing that the amendment came into effect post the Assessment Year in question, thereby rendering the provisions inapplicable retrospectively. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's order and concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed at the admission stage, upholding the Tribunal's decision and the assessee's non-liability for TDS on the prize distribution by draw of lots.
|
