2014 (10) TMI 663

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aja for Sri K.K.Viswanatham ORDER (Per Honble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy) This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order, dated 25.06.2002 passed by the Visakhapatnam Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in I.T.A.No.25/V/2002. The facts, in brief, are as under: The respondent is a manufacturer of electrical conductors of different categories. An item of conducto....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f. Hence, this appeal. Heard Sri S.R. Ashok, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, and Smt K. Neeraja, learned counsel for the respondent. The facts, that gave rise to the filing of the appeal, are not in dispute. The entire controversy turns around the question as to whether the respondent has acquired the right to receive the balance of 10% of the consideration for the conductor suppli....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of the conductor being found to be in order. That eventuality, admittedly, did not take place within that assessment year. The Tribunal has dealt with the matter extensively by referring to quite a large number of precedents on the subject. For example, in Seth Pushalal Mansinghka (P.) Ltd., v. Commissioner of Income-tax 66 ITR 159, the Supreme Court explained subtle itself between the words....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation of the said principle to the facts of the present case, it emerges that the respondent was no doubt entitled to receive 10% of the consideration for the goods supplied by it. However, the corresponding obligation of the recipient of the goods would have arisen only when a certificate, to the effect that the quality conform to the specifications. That event, admittedly did not take place, by ....