9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1271 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - addition on accrual of income - deferred revenue - Held that - The agreement could be terminated within a period of 6 years and amount had to be refunded.The assessee had allowed licensee to use the rights and therefore, the payment received by it has to be treated as royalty. The assessee is following mercantile system of accounting and is entitled to recognise his revenue on accrual basis.The rights of the TV Serial were to come back to the assessee after a period of 6 years.Thus, it is not a case of sale. But receipt is directly related to royalty received by the assessee from the licensee. AS-9 allows deferment of royalty income. Thus, in our opinion the assessee had rightly offered the incomes in six AY.s proportionately. Therefore, reversing the order of the FAA and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we decide the effective Ground of appeal in favour of the assessee. Addition on account of value added tax(VAT) - Held that - There is no evidence to prove that same was not part of the payment received from Moser Bayer. The amount received by the assessee included VAT. Therefore,we hold that the order of the FAA cannot be endorsed - Decided in favour of the assessee.
Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 2. Addition of ?7,26,49,359 as accrued income and VAT. 3. Interpretation of agreements for TV serials distribution and taxation of income. 4. Comparison with a similar case involving Moti Sagar. 5. Treatment of VAT as part of the payment received. Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal The appellant challenged the order of the CIT (A)-4, Mumbai, citing a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal. An affidavit explained the delay due to the authorized person being out of station. The Tribunal decided to adjudicate the appeal on merits and condone the delay. Issue 2: Addition of ?7,26,49,359 as accrued income and VAT The Assessing Officer (AO) added ?7.26 crores as accrued income and ?32.07 lakhs as VAT to the total income. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) confirmed this addition, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant argued that the addition was unjustified as the income was accrued during the relevant year. The Tribunal referred to a similar case involving Moti Sagar and decided in favor of the appellant, recognizing the income proportionately over a period of time. Issue 3: Interpretation of agreements for TV serials distribution and taxation of income The appellant entered into an agreement for TV serial distribution, receiving ?50 lakhs and distributing the income over six years. The AO treated the transaction as a sale of goods, but the appellant argued it was royalty payment. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, recognizing the income proportionately over the years and treating it as royalty income. Issue 4: Comparison with a similar case involving Moti Sagar The Tribunal compared the present case with a similar case involving Moti Sagar, where the Tribunal deliberated on a comparable issue of income addition. The Tribunal's decision in the Moti Sagar case supported the appellant's argument, leading to a favorable judgment in the present case. Issue 5: Treatment of VAT as part of the payment received The Tribunal noted that there was no evidence to prove that VAT was not part of the payment received. As the amount received by the appellant included VAT, the Tribunal decided in favor of the appellant, overturning the FAA's decision on this matter. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, favoring the appellant on the issues related to accrued income and VAT. The judgment highlighted the importance of interpreting agreements accurately and recognizing income based on the mercantile system of accounting.
|
