9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d but by accepting the claims for damages upon the cancellation of the contracts. The Appellate Tribunal referred to Section 43(5) of the Act and the judgment of HANS MACHOO AND CO. case [2000 (9) TMI 50 - DELHI HIGH COURT] in similar circumstances, held the assessee had not taken delivery of a consignment of sugar and the assessee suffered damages as a consequence thereof. The Appellate Tribunal in the present case relied on the reasoning in the Delhi judgement that what the assessee had done was to act in derogation of the terms of the relevant contract or commit a breach thereof as a consequence whereof it was liable to pay damages. Even if a party in breach accepts the claim for damages that the other party to the contract may put ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o aspects thereof: the ground of speculative transaction as raised by the assessing officer and upheld by the Dispute Resolution Panel: and, the date which has to be reckoned for the purpose of determining the arm s length price in a contract with an associate concern. As far as the second issue is concerned, not much has been said on behalf of the Revenue, particularly since the Dispute Resolution Panel accepted the assessee s contention that it is the rate indicated in the contract which has to be compared to the rate prevailing on the date of the contract rather than the rate prevailing when the invoice is raised. The Appellate Tribunal has merely endorsed the view taken by the DRP. Since it is a possible view taken after considerable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Delhi judgement that what the assessee had done was to act in derogation of the terms of the relevant contract or commit a breach thereof as a consequence whereof it was liable to pay damages. Even if a party in breach accepts the claim for damages that the other party to the contract may put forward, what actually happens is the disposal of a dispute and not any settlement of the kind that is envisaged by the word settled used in Section 43(5) of the Act. Since the Appellate Tribunal relied on a legal proposition that has held the field for a considerable period, the order impugned does not warrant any interference on such score. ITAT No. 37 of 2015 and GA No 542 of 2015 are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
