9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 516X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e documents to prove it. If the tax had been paid by the sub-contractors and if the assessee was also called upon to pay tax, it would amount to double taxation. The matter was to be remanded to the assessing officer. - 93 of 2000 - - - Dated:- 15-7-2008 - K. L. MANJUNATH and MRS. B. V. NAGARATUNA JJ. E. R. Indra Kumar for the appellant. K. R. Prasad and Kulkarni for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by 1. K. L. MANJIJNATH J. - This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the concurrent findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in l867/Bang/91 for the assessment year 1989-90. On April 3, 2001, when the matter was liste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the time of admission, we are of the opinion that after hearing learned counsel for both the parties on ascertaining the facts and question of law arises for our consideration, we have to formulate the questions and if such questions of law arises, we have to answer the same in accordance with law. 3. We have heard Sri E. R. Indrakumar for the Revenue and Mr. Kulkarni for the respondent/assessee. 4. The facts leading to this case are as under: The assessee is a contractor and it is a partnership firm engaged in constructional activities after obtaining contract work from the PWD and other works. The assessee filed a return for the assessment year 1989-90 declaring a loss of Rs.5,07,350. The case was taken up by the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee. Considering these two points, the order of assessment was completed. The demand was raised for payment of Rs.7,64,728 and further there is an order to initiate penalty proceedings .1t section 271(1)(c) of the Act separately. 6. The assessee aggrieved by the same filed an appeal before the Corn missioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Bangalore, on the ground that the award amount received by it amounting to Rs.25,19,369 pursuant to an arbitration award was on account of the sub-contractors. Since the amount received by the assessee had been paid to the sub-contractors on account if the work being executed by the sub-contractors and that the same can tot be considered as an income of the assessee, it is entitled for a commission. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was received on account of the sub-contractors. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Corn missioner of Income-tax and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the present appeal is filed by the Revenue. 8. Though several questions of law are framed by the Revenue in the appeal memo, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that we have to reformulate the question of law framed in the appeal memo and answer the same in accordance with law. According to us the following substantial questions of law arise: "1. Whether the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal were justified in reversing the findings of the Assessing Officer even though the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the sub-contractor what was the amount payable to the assessee and even if the award was passed in favour of the assessee, whether the assessee had in turn passed on the award amount to the sub-contractor and whether the sub-contractor in his return had declared the receipt of the arbitration award amount? If the award amount which is stated to have been disbursed by the assessee to the sub-contractor, we are of the opinion that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal were justified in deleting the aforesaid amount, but the assessee has not produced adequate documents to prove the same. 10. Before us Mr. Kulkarni has produced certain returns said to have been filed by the sub-contractors to show that the sub-c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
