https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71407 An excess amount received under a court-sanctioned interim arrangement over the controlled levy price of sugar was treated as a provisional, refundable receipt rather than a crystallised trading receipt. Because the payment was subject to refund with interest, backed by bank guarantees, and dependent on the outcome of pending writ proceedings and the statutory scheme governing excess realisation, the assessee had no vested and unconditional right to retain it as income in the relevant year. Sections 4 and 5 of the Income-tax Act tax only income that has accrued or arisen, and section 145 does not change the character of the receipt itself; the amount therefore was not includible in total income for that year. en-us Sat, 22 Sep 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:30:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71407 An excess amount received under a court-sanctioned interim arrangement over the controlled levy price of sugar was treated as a provisional, refundable receipt rather than a crystallised trading receipt. Because the payment was subject to refund with interest, backed by bank guarantees, and dependent on the outcome of pending writ proceedings and the statutory scheme governing excess realisation, the assessee had no vested and unconditional right to retain it as income in the relevant year. Sections 4 and 5 of the Income-tax Act tax only income that has accrued or arisen, and section 145 does not change the character of the receipt itself; the amount therefore was not includible in total income for that year. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 22 Sep 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71407