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accepted that players have to incur expenditure - Even though the allowance at 75% of receipt by the Circular was withdrawn during the year, considering that assessee has paid about 45% of the amount by way of cheque, the disallowance out of cash expenditure would work out almost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.
|