• Welcome to itatonline.org Forum.
 

A dress designer is an artist for purposes of section 80RR

Started by pawansingla, July 26, 2010, 11:56:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

pawansingla

•   •        There is nothing in the statutory provision of section 80RR which would confine the meaning of the expression "artist" to a person engaged in the fine arts.

[2010] 5 taxmann.com 109 (Bom.)
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CIT
v.
Tarun R. Tahiliani
ITA (L) Nos. 922 and 1275 of 2009
June 14, 2010

In Bharat Bhawan Trust vs. Bharat Bhawan Artists Association,2 (2001) 7 SCC 630, the Supreme Court considered whether an artist engaged in the production of a drama or in theatre management would be a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Answering the question in the negative, the Supreme Court observed as follows:
"The work that the respondents perform is in the nature of a creative art and their work is neither subject to an order required from the Art Director nor from any of the artists. In performing their work, they have to bring to their work, their artistic ability, talent and a sense of perception for the purpose of production of drama involving in the course of such work, the application of the correct technique and the selection of the cast, the play, the manner of presentation, the light and effects and so on. In effect, the work they do is creative art which only a person with an artistic talent and requisite technique can manage. To call such a person, a skilled or a manual worker is altogether inappropriate." (emphasis supplied).
For the purpose of this case, the significance of the judgment lies in its emphasis on the element of creativity, talent and a sense of perception as being the hall mark of a person who is an artist.

12. The Tribunal in the present case, was not in error in holding that the assessee is an artist for the purposes of Section 80RR. The question of law is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. It is an admitted position before the Court that the deduction was sought by the assessee only in respect of design fees that were received by him in convertible foreign exchange. The appeals shall accordingly stand dismissed. No order as to costs.