9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 969X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brought to tax at the rate of 40% as contemplated under Section 115BB of the Act. The order passed by the Tribunal, which affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the order passed by the Tribunal is set aside.- Decided in favour of Revenue. - Tax Case (Appeal) No.27 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 30-8-2018 - Mr. T. S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. V. Bhavani Subbaroyan JJ. For the Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel For the Respondent-2 : Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT [Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] This appeal, by the Revenue, is directed against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras A Bench, Chennai dated 11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he higher rate of tax as applicable to winnings from betting, etc. has been brought down to 30%, on a par with the rate applicable for other incomes as a measure of rationalization. Therefore, the intent of the legislature to levy tax at the rate of 40% for the relevant assessment year on the winnings from betting, etc. is apparent as otherwise, the very existence of the said provision in the Act would be meaningless. 12.On a careful perusal of the above provisions of law and the legislative intent, this Court is not inclined to accept the view as propounded by the Tribunal and the Commissioner (Appeals), as Section 115BB of the Act is a standalone special provision, which makes it clear that income of an assessee, not being income fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also by the Tribunal is misconceived and does not stand legal scrutiny. 14.Further, it is curious to note that the Tribunal, in the penultimate paragraph of its order, while observing that Section 58(4) with its proviso clause does not apply to the assessee's case, the assessee being the owner of horses maintained by him for running in horse races , has held that the A combined reading of Section 115BB and the proviso to section 58(4) along with the CBDT circular no.721 dated 13.09.1995 fortify the action of the Commissioner (Appeals) and we see no justification to interfere with the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue . We are at a loss to understand as to how the Tribunal concurred with the decision of the Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
