By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
India Times NowIndia Times NowIndia Times Now
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
  • Bharat Shreshtha Ratna Sanman
  • India News
  • Categories
    • Technology
    • Entertainment
    • The Escapist
    • Insider
    • Finance ₹
    • India News
    • Science
    • Health
Reading: Actor Vijay’s tax penalty case: Madras High Court reserves orders
Share
India Times NowIndia Times Now
Font ResizerAa
  • Bharat Shreshtha Ratna Sanman
  • India News
  • Categories
Search
  • Bharat Shreshtha Ratna Sanman
  • India News
  • Categories
    • Technology
    • Entertainment
    • The Escapist
    • Insider
    • Finance ₹
    • India News
    • Science
    • Health
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US

Home » Actor Vijay’s tax penalty case: Madras High Court reserves orders

India News

Actor Vijay’s tax penalty case: Madras High Court reserves orders

India Times Now Desk
Last updated: January 23, 2026 4:10 pm
India Times Now Desk
Published: January 23, 2026
Share
SHARE


The assessment order also stated the actor would not have disclosed the additional income but for the search and seizure operation. File

The assessment order also stated the actor would not have disclosed the additional income but for the search and seizure operation. File
| Photo Credit: The Hindu

The Madras High Court on Friday (January 23, 2026) reserved its orders on a writ petition filed by actor and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C. Joseph Vijay in 2022 against imposition of a penalty of ₹1.5 crore on him by the Income Tax department for not having voluntarily disclosed an additional income of ₹15 crore during the financial year 2015-16.

Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy deferred his verdict after hearing the petitioner’s counsel and I-T department senior standing counsel A.P. Srinivas who vehemently opposed the writ petition and contended that the penalty had been rightly imposed under Section 271AAB(1) of the I-T Act. The standing counsel urged the court to dismiss the actor’s writ petition.

In his arguments, the petitioner’s counsel contended the penalty proceedings were hit by the limitation period. Stating that the proceedings must have been initiated on or before June 30, 2019 and not on June 30, 2022, he claimed, the limitation period would begin from the date when the Assessing Officer refers a matter to the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax.

Taking the judge through the facts of the case, Mr. Srinivas told the court that the I-T sleuths had conducted a search and seizure operation at the premises belonging to Mr. Vijay on September 30, 2015 and seized certain incriminating materials.

The materials indicated that P.T. Selvakumar and Shibu of SKT Studios, producers of the actor’s 2015 movie Puli, had paid him ₹4.93 crore in cash apart from the remuneration of ₹16 crore through cheques. They had deposited the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) only for the cheque amount and not the cash transaction.

When the actor was confronted with the records, he reportedly admitted to have received ₹5 crore in cash and agreed to pay the taxes for it. When asked how much of unaccounted income had the actor earned in the last six years, he replied he hadn’t received any unaccounted cash but for the ₹5 crore for Puli.

Nevertheless, in order to cooperate with the I-T department and to resolve the tax issues in an amicable manner, the actor agreed to disclose an additional income of ₹15 crore (including the cash transaction of ₹5 crore) for the financial year 2015-16 and pay the necessary taxes for it.

Subsequently, on July 29, 2016, he filed his return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 declaring his total income to be ₹35.42 crore including the additional ₹15 crore. While filing the returns, he claimed depreciation of assets worth ₹17.81 lakh and sought exemption for his fans’ club expenses of ₹64.71 lakh.

However, the department disallowed his claims and passed an assessment order on December 30, 2017, determining the taxable income to be ₹38.25 crore. The assessment order also stated the actor would not have disclosed the additional income but for the search and seizure operation.

Therefore, the department imposed penalty under Sections 271(1)(c) and 271AAB(1) of the I-T Act. Though, he chose to go on statutory appeal against the assessment order as well as the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c), the penalty under Section 271AAB(1) alone had been challenged by way of a writ petition.

Published – January 23, 2026 09:40 pm IST



Source link

Invalid votes, cross-voting pulled NC’s vote share down in each round of the J&K Rajya Sabha poll
The invisibilised workforce behind Durga Puja festivities
NDA will win Ghatshila by-poll, claims Babulal Marandi
Telangana’s legitimate rights over Tungabhadra waters will not be compromised: Uttam
Two traffic police personnel caught on camera accepting bribes
TAGGED:actor vijay tax caseactor vijay undisclosed incomevijay tax penalty case
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
YoutubeSubscribe
TelegramFollow

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
[mc4wp_form]
Popular News

Resisting delimitation can be more harmful for southern States

India Times Now Desk
India Times Now Desk
April 13, 2026
Seven from Telangana named for Padma Shri honour
Elderly woman allegedly robbed of gold worth ₹11.6 lakh in Muvattupuzha
Manifestos of key fronts recognise need for regeneration of canals in Kochi
Market Opening Bell: Sensex up 271 points, Nifty holds 24,000 ahead of Fed rate decision | Markets
- Advertisement -
Ad imageAd image
Global Coronavirus Cases

Confirmed

0

Death

0

More Information:Covid-19 Statistics
© INDIA TIMES NOW 2026 . All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?