Tamil Actor Sivakarthikeyan gets Income Tax Refund of Rs. 12.60 Lakh from Tax Department

Tamil actor Sivakarthikeyan received an Income Tax Refund of Rs.12.60 lakh from the Income Tax Department, resolving a TDS repayment dispute before the Madras High Court.

The Madras High Court dismissed the actor’s writ case in 2022, acknowledging the Income Tax Department‘s confirmation of the funds put in his bank account.

The petitioner, Actor D Sivakarthikeyan, requested that the Madras High Court order respondents 1 to 4 to refund a sum of Rs. 91,16,490 fraudulently recovered from the petitioner in violation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, together with interest.

In his affidavit, Sivakarthikeyan revealed a formal agreement with Aadnah Arts, represented by K.E. Gnanavel Raja, for a movie part worth Rs.15 crore in 2018, excluding GST.

The deal detailed a payment schedule, including Rs.2 crore before signing, Rs.1 crore before shooting begins, Rs.7 crore throughout the shoot, Rs.2 crore before dubbing completion, Rs.2 crore before audio release and the last Rs.1 crore before theatrical release.

Due to Gnanavelraja’s refusal to submit the TDS, TDS discrepancies of Rs.65.50 lakh and Rs.1.11 lakh were discovered for the assessment years 2019-20 and 2020-21, respectively. The non-remittance resulted in the collection of Rs.91.16 lakh from Sivakarthikeyan’s bank account in February 2022. Seeking a refund, the actor emphasised the producer’s subsequent resolution of the issue, which resulted in the Income Tax Department refunding Rs.12.60 lakh with interest.

The Madras High Court issued the following ruling:

“Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that they are in the process of releasing the Income Tax Refund for a sum of Rs.12,60,700 along with interest for which the petitioner is entitled. Accordingly, post the item on 01.12.2023 under the heading “For Reporting Compliance”.”

The Income Tax Department also presented evidence in relation to the abovementioned deposit before the Madras High Court and claimed that the refund money would be paid to the petitioner’s account on the day of the hearing itself.