9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent:- Sri M.V. SHESHACHALA, ADV. JUDGMENT The revenue has come up in this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, in ITA No.9/Bang/2008 dt.26.9.2008. The questions of law that arises for our consideration in this appeal is: 1) Whether an Interim award passed by the Arbitrator against the assessee to pay a sum of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee claimed deduction during the relevant assessment year to an extent of ₹ 52.84 lakhs. The contention of the was rejected by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee can recover the said amount from the Central Government, therefore, the same cannot be permitted to be deducted. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us, if any, amount is paid pursuant to an Interim order, would be subject to the final award of the Arbitration proceedings and in the Arbitration proceedings, if ultimately held that the assessee is not liable to pay any amount and the amount of ₹ 52.84 lakhs or any sum paid by the assessee has to be recovered from the Sub-contractor, the assessee is bound to brought the same into the acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
