News shortcuts: From the Courts | Top Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | Professional Updates | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
« From the Courts »
  Neha Chowdhary vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
 Volkswagen Finance Pvt Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
 Aricent Technologies Holdings Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
  Amazonite Steel Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI (Calcutta High Court)
 Amazonite Steel Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI (Calcutta High Court)
 New Delhi Television Ltd vs. DCIT (Supreme Court)
 Paradigm Geophysical Pty Ltd vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
 In Re: Extention of Interim Orders (Bombay High Court)
 In Re Cognizance For Extension Of Limitation (Supreme Court)
 Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs. DCIT (Supreme Court)
 Jayaprakash Nagar Vill. Roja Jajalpur, Dadri, Gr. Noida, Noida Uttar Pradesh Vs. ITO Ward-1(5) Noida, Uttar Pradesh

I-T challenges Bachchans Tax payments
January, 16th 2009

The Bombay High Court on Thursday had admitted the appeal made by the Income Tax (I-T) department against Amitabh Bachchan in an alleged tax evasion case.

The I-T had challenged the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had ruled in the favor of Bachchan in an alleged tax evasion on the income earned by the latter from the Rs. 23 crore contract.

Bachchan had entered the Rs. 23 crore contract in 2000-01 with E. Entertainment Pvt Ltd (EEL) and Star Entertainment Ltd (SEL) to host the reality show Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC).

The division bench of Justice F I Rebello and Justice R S Mohite while admitting the appeal expressed shock on the order passed by the ITAT. While reffering the 30-70 percent distribution of income between Bachchan and his company (ABCL), Justice Rebello remarked The tribunal cannot decide whose income it is.

On the other hand council for the I-T, Beni chatterji and G. C. Srivastava said that Bachchan had filed his returns on October 31st, 2001. While filing the returns Bachchan had discharged only 30 percent of the Rs. 23 crore earned from KBC as his income. The remaining 70 percent he claimed was the payment received by ABCL.

Nevertheless, I-T in its appeal had mention that even tax was deducted in this regard and TDS certificate was issued in the name of Bachchan and not in the name of ABCL.

However, on May 18, 2005, the ITAT had accepted Bachchans arguments and also allowed him tax exemption on the alleged payment to ABCL.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2020 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting