SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Mad) 2011

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.JAYASIMHA BABU & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.SINGHARAVELU
The Commissioner of Income Tax - Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director of Small Savings - Respondents
T.C.Nos.450 and 451 of 2000
Decided On : 15 December 2003

Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioner:K.Subramanian, Senior Standing Counsel for IT. For The Respondent: V.Ramachandran, Senior counsel for M/s.Anitha Suganth.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'lottery' under Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the requirement of distribution of prizes by chance or lot among those who have paid a price for participating in the scheme.

Headnote:

lottery - Income Tax Act - Section 194-B - 194-B - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act - The judgment discusses the interpretation of 'lottery' under Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act and the applicability of tax deduction at source. It highlights the definition of 'lottery' and the requirement of distribution of prizes by chance or lot among those who have paid a price for participating in the scheme. The court also refers to relevant provisions and case laws to determine the nature of the scheme in question.

Fact of the Case:

The case involves the distribution of prizes under the District Level Gift Linked Savings Mobilisation Scheme and the applicability of Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act for tax deduction at source. The respondent released prizes worth Rs.72,94,480/- without deducting tax at source, leading to penalty imposition.

Finding of the Court:

The Tribunal held that the distribution of prizes did not constitute 'lottery' under Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act, and therefore, the respondent was not liable to deduct tax at source. The proceedings taken against the respondent were deemed to be without jurisdiction.

Issues: The main issue revolved around whether the distribution of prizes under the scheme constituted a 'lottery' as per Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act and the applicability of tax deduction at source.

Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the definition of 'lottery' and emphasized the requirement of distribution of prizes by chance or lot among those who had paid a price for participating in the scheme. It referred to relevant provisions, case laws, and legal interpretations to determine the nature of the scheme and the applicability of tax deduction at source.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the penalty was not imposed once it was found that there had been no violation of the law.

Judgment :-

R.Jayasimha Babu, J.

The question raised by the Revenue in this appeal is as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that distribution of prizes under the District Level Gift Linked Savings Mobilisation Scheme did not constitute 'lottery' and the provisions of Section 194-B of the Income Tax Act are not applicable and if applicable, as to whether the Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty imposed.

2. In order to encourage thrift as also to mobilise funds for the developmental works, Saving Schemes are operated by the Government. Under the gift linked scheme, a prize coupon is given to the investor when the investment made is in excess of Rs.1,000/-. The investor does not pay any price for those coupons. Prizes are awarded to the holder of the lucky coupon, which is chosen by lot. The prizes given are consumer goods, such as, fan, colour television, moped etc. During the accounting year ended 31-3-1998, the assessment year being 1998-99, the respondent released prizes worth Rs.72,94,480/-. According to the Revenue, before distributing those prizes, the assessee ought to have deducted tax at source in a sum of Rs.29,17,792/-.

3. As no tax had been deducted at source, the assessing officer, invoking the provisions of Section 201, issued notice to the respondent treating him as the assessee in default. Additional sum of Rs.2,39,919/- was also demanded as interest under Section 201(1-A) of the Act. Subsequently, penalty in a sum of Rs.29,17,792/- equal to the amount of tax that had allegedly required to be, but not with-held, was also levied.

4. The appeals filed by the respondent against those orders having proved unsuccessful, the respondent thereafter carried the matter to the Tribunal, which agreed with the assessee and held that the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source and therefore, all the proceedings taken against the respondent were without jurisdiction.

5. Section 194-B of the Act, which was inserted with effect from 1-4-1972, as it stood at the relevant year, is captioned "Winnings from lottery or crossword puzzle". It reads thus:

"194-B: The person responsible for paying to any person any income by way of winnings from any lottery or crossword puzzle in an amount exceeding Rupees five thousand, shall, at the time of payment thereof, deduct income-tax thereon at the rates in force.

Provided that no deduction shall be made under this section from any payment made before the 1st day of June, 1972.

Provided further that in a case where the winnings are wholly in kind or partly in cash and partly in kind but the part in cash is not sufficient to meet the liability of deduction of tax in respect of whole of the winnings, the person responsible for paying shall, before releasing the winnings, ensure that tax has been paid in respect of the winnings."

6. By the Finance Act, 1972, which introduced Section 194-B, a new sub-clause (ix) was introduced in the definition of 'income' in Section 2(24) of the Act, which reads thus:

"2(24) ....

(ix) any winnings from lotteries, crossword puzzles, races including horse races, card games and other games of any sort or from gambling or betting of any form or nature whatsoever "

The winnings from lotteries on and after 1.4.1972 were included within the scope of the definition of 'income' and the person responsible for paying to any person any income in excess of Rupees five thousand by way of winnings from lottery, was required to deduct income tax on the amount so paid at the rates in force.

7. Prior to 1.4.2002, the Act did not contain a definition of 'lottery'. In the Finance Act, 2001, an Explanation was added below Section 2(24)(ix), which Explanation reads thus:

"Explanation:-- For the purposes of this sub-clause, --

(i) "lottery" includes winnings from prizes awarded to any person by draw of lots or by chance or in any other manner whatsoever, under any scheme or arrangement by whatever name called;

(ii) "card game and other game of any sort" includes any game show,



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top