9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arise for consideration in the assessment year 1980-81 in question? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it was relevant or necessary for the Tribunal while considering the appeals for the assessment year 1980-81 to give a finding that income by way of outstanding price, contractual interest and interest as per the awards up to 20-7-1977 arose in the assessment year 1978-79 ?" 2. Insofar as the second question is concerned, learned counsel for the assessee, at whose instance the question is referred to us, does not press this question and, therefore, we return the reference in this regard unanswered. 3. Insofar as the first question is concerned, the sum and substance is whether the amount of interest in terms o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal Bank of Pakistan, which had stood guarantee for payment to the assessee, challenged the arbitration awards. The High Court in London, in the first instance, by its order dated 14-4-1976 held the awards to be valid, binding and enforceable. While upholding the award of the principal amount to the assessee, interest and costs were also directed to be paid to the assessee. In compliance with the decision of the High Court in London, the National Bank of Pakistan deposited the entire decretal amount with the London branch of the Bank of India on 3-5-1976. In terms of the direction given by the High Court in London, the assessee placed the amount in fixed deposit for 18 months. 7. The National Bank of Pakistan filed an appeal against the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to refer certain questions of law to this Court. 11. One of the questions of law that the revenue sought reference of was to the effect whether the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,11,51,264 taxed as interest income on receipt basis. 12. The petition filed by the revenue was dismissed by this Court by an order dated 8-11-1990 and it was held as follows :- "Question No. 3 arises from the fact that interest awarded by the arbitrator was being taxed both on accrual and receipt basis. According to the department, the interest was chargeable on accrual basis while the assessee had been contending that it was chargeable on receipt basis. Counsel for the respondent informs us that the respondent has accepted the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revenue for the last several years, namely, that the amount is liable to be taxed on an accrual basis. We say this because as held by this Court on 8-11-1990 while disposing of ITC No. 159/1987 that the stand of the revenue is that the interest is taxable on accrual basis. Even the assessee had accepted this contention of the revenue and, therefore, there can be no doubt that the amount is liable to be taxed only on accrual basis. It is now too late in the day, after 17 years, for the revenue to raise the contention that the amount is liable to be taxed on receipt basis. Even otherwise, we find no reason to differ with the view already expressed by this Court on an earlier occasion. 16. Following the view expressed by this Court in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
