Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1988 (11) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lms (1) Thief of Bagdad and (2) Paapi. The producers of the second film is M/s. Ralhan Productions. The agreement with the assessee is dated 3rd Aug. 1977. In that agreement, Ralhan Productions is described as the principal and the assessee as the agent. The agents i.e. the assessee have to pay the principal a total sum of Rs. 4,04,444 by way of minimum guarantee. In addition to the above minimum guarantee, the distributors i.e. the assessee should further spend a collective sum of Rs. 50,000 on pre-release and release publicity of the said picture on the producer's account. It would appear that the assessees should give an estimate of such publicity expenses in advance for approval and after obtaining the approval the amount will be spent ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... circuit : Rs. 4,35,000-00 Total : Rupees Four lakhs thirty five thousand only. ----------------------------- 4. As a matter of fact, the assessee incurred publicity expenditure of Rs. 34,227 as against the budgeted amount of Rs. 50,000 in the case of Paapi. In the other case of Thief of Bagdad as against the budgeted amount of Rs. 60,000, the assessee had spent only Rs. 14,613. Thus, there is surplus left with the assessee of Rs. 15,773 in the case of Paapi and Rs. 45,387 in the case of Thief of Bagdad. The Income-tax Officer brought both these items to tax. 5. Against these findings, the assessee went on appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that factually the assessee has not incurred any more expenditure then what was noted by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the contracting parties was going to be a part of the cost of the acquisition of the distribution rights. The cost, however, of all these rights are to be met in two different ways. The amounts other than the publicity expenditure has to be paid in cash by the assessee to the producer's. Thus, in the case of Paapi, the assessee has to pay in cash out of the collections Rs. 4,04,444. Apart from this, the assessee has also to incur on behalf of the Producer's expenditure for publicity. The producers have agreed that such expenses would be to the extent of Rs. 50,000 in the case of Paapi. To this extent, the assessee can reimburse himself from the collections. While reporting to the Producer regarding the collections, he can justify the publi....