Madras H.C : Having heard counsel, perused the order of the Tribunal, as also the instruction issued by the Board being Instruction No. 1310, dt. 26th Feb., 1980, we do not find any goods reason to call for a reference.

High Court Of Madras

CIT vs. K. Chiranjeevi

Section 256(2)

R. Jayasimha Babu & K. Gnanaprakasam, JJ.

Tax Case Petn. No. 18 of 2000

2nd March, 2001

Counsel Appeared

Mrs. Chitra Venkatraman, for the Petitioner : P.P.S. Janardhana Raja, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. :

Having heard counsel, perused the order of the Tribunal, as also the instruction issued by the Board being Instruction No. 1310, dt. 26th Feb., 1980, we do not find any goods reason to call for a reference.

2. The Tribunal has held that the assessee, who is a film actor, maintained his accounts in the cash system, and that under the annuity policy, he was to receive the annuities in terms of the policy, though the producer had paid the full value of the policy for purchasing the policy. So far as the assessee is concerned, the amount would reach him only as and when the annuity was paid to him by the insurance company. Even in earlier assessment years, the assessee had been assessed to tax only on the amounts actually received by him during the year. The tax case petition is dismissed.

[Citation : 254 ITR 571]

Malcare WordPress Security