Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 258 - AT - Income TaxClaim of exemption on award money – Allowance of expenditure – Held that:- The incomes are offered under the head 'income from business or profession', that does not mean that assessee is a professional player - assessee is playing for the country under the aegis of BCCI and he has no individual professional involvement to play in any match as he wish - the findings of the CIT(A) upheld that assessee is not a professional cricketer – Decided against Revenue. Restriction of disallowance u/s 57(iii) of the Act - Expenditure claimed against earning of logo money – Held that:- There was no reason to interfere with the well-reasoned order of the learned CIT(A) -There is no dispute with reference to the Circular of Board which in principle accepted that players have to incur expenditure - Even though the allowance at 75% of receipt by the Circular was withdrawn during the year, considering that assessee has paid about 45% of the amount by way of cheque, the disallowance out of cash expenditure would work out almost 40% of the amount paid in cash – Decided against Revenue. Restriction of disallowance u/s 57(iii) of the Act - Expenditure claimed against earning of match fees – Held that:- AO was not justified in disallowing the entire expenditure on the reason that being a popular cricketer and was also captain of Indian cricket for several years no expenditure would be incurred by the cricketer and all expenses were borne by the BCCI - CIT(A) has erred in restricting the amount to 50% of the claim - in the earlier year also, he has examined the expenditure incurred by the assessee and considered 20% of the amount only to be disallowed - Since assessee has accepted such disallowance in earlier year, it is reasonable to restrict the disallowance to 20% of the claim as in earlier year to be consistent with the facts of the case - the order of the CIT(A) modified and claim of expenditure is allowed subject to disallowance at 20% - Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Deduction u/s 80RR of the Act – Amount received towards advertisement for acting in ad-movies – Held that:- The CIT(A) got carried away by the role of assessee as cricketer - Even though assessee may be reputed cricketer, for acting in T.V./ print media, it requires special talent – Even though he may not be professional cricketer, he can pursue modelling as a professional - the A.O. rejected the claim on the reason that assessee was not a professional cricketer and income from modelling on advertisements was not derived from exercise of his profession – The decision in Sachin R. Tendulkar vs. ACIT [2011 (5) TMI 20 - ITAT MUMBAI] followed - the income received by the assessee from modelling and appearing in T.V. commercials and similar activities could be termed as income derived from the profession of 'an artist' - there was no bar on the part of the assessee to have its second profession as an artist apart from playing cricket – thus, the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80RR of the I.T. Act – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|