https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399080 Retention of possession of premises kept the appellants liable for rent or damages for use and occupation, even though the business had closed and the premises were not being used, because the liability continued until vacant possession was surrendered. The appellants also could not repudiate the quantum of damages and commission where the arbitrator had computed them on the basis of their own statement of accounts, accepted in the proceedings and acted upon for tax purposes, and no clear legal or factual error was shown. The award and concurrent findings were substantially affirmed, with only post-award interest modified. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Oct 2020 11:21:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399080 Retention of possession of premises kept the appellants liable for rent or damages for use and occupation, even though the business had closed and the premises were not being used, because the liability continued until vacant possession was surrendered. The appellants also could not repudiate the quantum of damages and commission where the arbitrator had computed them on the basis of their own statement of accounts, accepted in the proceedings and acted upon for tax purposes, and no clear legal or factual error was shown. The award and concurrent findings were substantially affirmed, with only post-award interest modified. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399080