Rs 1.5 Crore Tax Penalty: Vijay Approaches Madras HC Again:

Rs 1.5 Crore Tax Penalty: Vijay Approaches Madras HC Again Famous Actor and TVK chief Vijay AKA "Vijay Thalapathy" has approached the Madras High Court again after a single judge dismissed his earlier petition. The case is about a penalty of Rs 1.5 crore imposed on him by the Income Tax (I-T) department for not fully disclosing his income for the assessment year 2015-16.

Also Read

Opportunity to Reply Restored: High Court Remits ITC Dispute for Reconsideration

Backstory of the case

Vijay filed an appeal on March 2 against the single judge’s February 6 order. However, the court registry has not yet completed the process of officially numbering the appeal. According to court rules, such an appeal must be filed within 30 days from the date of the order. If not done within that time, it may be rejected as being filed too late. On February 6, Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy dismissed Vijay’s earlier plea. The judge ruled that the I-T department had imposed the penalty within the legally allowed time limit under Section 275(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The court said there was no valid reason to interfere with the penalty order. However, the judge allowed Vijay the option to challenge the penalty before the appropriate appellate authority on other grounds, except for the issue of time limitation.

Also Read

GST E-waybill: High Court slams GST Department for detaining Goods for 4 Months Without Seizure Order

The penalty order was originally issued on June 30, 2022. It followed a 2015 search by the I-T department at Vijay’s premises and the office of SKT Productions. During the search, officials reportedly found documents showing that Vijay had received Rs 4.93 crore in cash in addition to a Rs 16 crore cheque payment from the producers. This extra cash amount was allegedly not shown in his accounts. The department imposed a penalty of Rs 1.5 crore for not disclosing around Rs 5 crore in income and also referred to another Rs 10 crore that was later shown as income. Vijay appealed against the penalty, and CIT (A) partly ruled in his favour. However, the I-T department then challenged that decision before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT partly allowed the department’s appeal. After this ruling, the penalty order was passed.