Sachin Tendulkar Once Called Himself An 'Actor,' Not A Cricketer, And Saved Rs 58 Lakh In Taxes

Cricket legend Sachin Tendulkar's name has long been synonymous with records and milestones on the field. But few know that he also made a mark in an entirely different arena, the tax court. In an unusual case from more than a decade ago, the batting icon successfully convinced the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) that his earnings from overseas brand endorsements should be treated as artistic income. This clever classification, according to a recent report by the Times of India, helped him save nearly Rs 58 lakh in taxes.

The Curious Case Of Sachin The 'Actor'

The story dates back to the early 2000s, when Tendulkar's foreign income from endorsements such as Pepsi, VISA, and ESPN-Star Sports amounted to about Rs 5.92 crore during the assessment years 2001–02 and 2004–05. On this income, he claimed a 30 per cent deduction under Section 80RR of the Income Tax Act, a provision that allows tax relief to artists, authors, and performers earning from foreign sources. The exemption amounted to roughly Rs 1.77 crore.

However, the Income Tax Department objected. Its argument was simple: Sachin was a professional cricketer, and his endorsement earnings were only incidental to his sporting career. Therefore, the Department said, the exemption was not available. But Tendulkar countered that his work in advertisements involved acting and modelling, both of which require performance and creativity.

He asserted that while cricket was his primary profession, he also engaged in acting when he performed in commercials.

ITAT's Unusual Interpretation

When the case finally landed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the bench didn't take a narrow view of what it means to be an "actor." It reasoned that performing in front of a camera, even for an advertisement, demands expression, imagination, and creative skill. In other words, it is still an artistic performance.

The Tribunal noted that Tendulkar's appearances in television commercials were not casual brand mentions but required him to act out roles, deliver lines, and project emotions to connect with audiences. That, the judges said, qualified him for the tax relief available to artists under Section 80RR of the Income Tax Act.

The verdict went in Sachin's favour, granting him a deduction of about Rs 1.77 crore on his foreign earnings and a resulting tax saving of roughly Rs 58 lakh. Over the years, this ruling has found its place as one of the more curious, yet defining, interpretations in India's tax jurisprudence.

More Than One Professional Identity

Beyond the numbers, the case left a valuable takeaway. It reminded professionals that a person can legitimately wear more than one hat. Tendulkar, while celebrated as a cricketer, also qualified as an artist when he performed before the camera. The ruling reaffirmed that tax law recognises such dual identities, and that income derived from creative expression can stand on its own, separate from one's primary profession.

Just as Sachin was both a cricketer and an actor, many modern professionals may straddle several creative or technical roles.

It's a reminder that understanding how one's income is classified and which tax provisions apply can make a significant difference to one's financial outcome. In Tendulkar's case, that difference was Rs 58 lakh.