COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV Vs. K CHIRANJEEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. The appeal is preferred against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'B' Bench, dated 28.08.2003 in ITA No.2553/95.

(2.) THE assessee is film artist and during the year, the deferred annuity was taken in favour of the assessee by the film producer in consideration of professional services. THE first premium was paid and for the remaining premia, the amount was handed over to a concern which is supposed to make payment for subsequent premia. THE Assessing Officer, while completing the assessment for the assessment year 1991-92, assessed the said sum of Rs.40 lakhs, on the ground that the assessee's case do not satisfy the requirements of both circular which stipulates exemption only for the amount paid and not for proposed future payments of annuity. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who followed the earlier decision in the assessee's own case and directed the deletion of the addition and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. On an appeal by the appellant/revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal also held the issue in favour of the assessee by following the decision of the assessee's own case reported in 254 ITR 571. Hence, the present appeal by the appellant/revenue raising the following substantial questions of law. 1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that since the amount had not reached the assessee's hands, the premium paid on the deferred annuity policy cannot be taxed" 2.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in ignoring the fact that the entire remuneration had been paid by the producers to the agent of the assessee, and as such the amount had been constructively received by the assessee"