News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
« From the Courts »
 Sanjeev Singh, 861, Sector-9 U.E, Karnal. vs. Pr. CIT, Karnal.
 M/s. Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., 1903, 19th Floor, India Bulls Finance Centre, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013. vs. ACIT, Special Range 6, New Delhi.
 Mohd. Umar, 272, Bani Sarai, Meerut vs. Income Tax Officer Ward – 1 (4), Meerut
 M/s. Superior Portfolio Pvt. Limited, 4663, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi-110002 vs Income Tax Officer Ward- 24 (4), New Delhi
 PCIT vs. A. A. Estate Pvt. Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Shyamsunder Rao Gone, Manchiryal, ADILABAD Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(3), HYDERABAD
 Shri Nikhil Agarwal, 9/49, 2nd Floor, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-71(2), New Delhi.
 Dharampal Satyapal Ltd, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-29, New Delhi
 Shri Manik Singh, S/o Dr. Meharban Singh, A-47, Sector 31, NOIDA. vs. Dy.C.I.T., Circle-2, Noida.
 Sushila Khandelwal B-88, First Floor Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi 110017 vs. Income Tax Officer Ward – 32 (3) New Delhi
 Shri A.K. Aggarwal, H.No.1711, Sector-9 vs. The ACIT, Circle Karnal. Haryana.

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 2019 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Software Development Software Programming Software Engineering Custom Software Development Requirement Based Software Development Software Solutions Software Serv

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions