9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in London. The assessee used to preserve all the letters received from Mr. Graham Greene since these letters had great literary value and considered as a source of study by research scholars. Knowing the literary value of the letters written by Mr. Graham Greene to the assessee, M/s Brown University in USA, approached the assessee through their agent M/s Glenn Horrowitz, suggesting to handover possession of the letters to them for preservation in a scientific manner. The assessee agreed to this deal and handed over possession of the letters to the agent of the university. In return for handing over possession of the letters, the agent M/s Glenn Horrowiz made a payment of $ 16,200 to the assessee. The assessee claimed that this amount of $ 16,200 (Rs. 2,08,197.75) is a capital receipt not liable to tax as it is for handing over possession of the letters. The AO rejected the claim of the assessee on the following grounds: "First of all, these letters are written by, Graham Greene to the assessee which cannot be treated as a capital asset. As admitted by the assessee himself in his letter dt. 16th Jan., 1989, the letters between the assessee and Mr. Graham Greene have got a unique ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned Departmental Representative supported the findings of the AO as the amount of Rs. 2,08,198 was only a casual and non-recurring receipt. The learned Authorised (sic-Departmental) Representative further argued that the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee himself had admitted that the letters had a unique value prized by scholars and the transaction is negotiated and settled by a professional agent. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the receipts constituted income chargeable. to tax. Accordingly, the learned Departmental Representative urged us to reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) on this issue and restore that of the AO. 5. We have carefully considered the entire materials on record. On a reading of the assessment order and appellate order, it is cleat that the assessee was not doing any vocation through the said transaction. The assessee is a distinguished author of several English books which are published in India and outside India. Mr. Graham Greene is a writer of great eminence who has held the first place in the English Liter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ily make the transaction a business and revenue transaction insofar as the appellant is concerned." 6. The argument of the Revenue is that even a single transaction could be treated as a revenue transaction does not hold any water. The learned Departmental Representative relied on the following decisions: 1. P. Krishna Menon vs. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 48 (SC); 2. C. Rajagopalachariar vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 196 (Mad); 3. K. Ramaswami Gounder vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (Mad) 204 : (1987) 163 ITR 94 (Mad). The learned CIT(A) considering the decision in the case of IRC vs. Fraser 24 Tax Cases 498 decided the issue in favour of the assessee with the following observations: "Weighing the totality of the evidence and the surrounding circumstances, I am of the view that the appellant had not, over the decades, preserved the letters from his eminent friend for the purpose of purveying them. When he however received this offer from the agents of Brown University he decided to part with them, and accepted the consideration for such parting. The character of such receipt would, therefore, not be of 'income'. This was but a mere sale of personal effects and the fact that the appellant's activi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... journals or the All India Radio, the writing of books and contributing articles to periodicals and magazines constituted a vocation and as the amounts arose from a vocation they were not exempt under s. 4(3)(vii). In a case like this even if the assessee did not expect any remuneration for his services, if the amount was really paid on account of the services, though voluntarily, the amount received would be taxable as income. A vocation is only a way of living or a sphere of activity for which one has special fitness. It is not necessary that such activity should be one indulged in for earning a livelihood before it can be called 'vocation'. Nor can it be said that a person cannot have more than one vocation. A motive for making a profit is not an essential requisite of a vocation. A vocation does not involve any organised or systematic activity like business." 9. In the other case, i.e., in the case of K. Ramaswami Gounder vs. CIT, the facts of the case are as follows: "The assessee received an amount of Rs. 28,830 in the accounting year 1970-71 as remuneration for services rendered as arbitrator. The ITO held that this amount was not exempt under s. 10(3). The order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
