Court held that since, in the original MoU, no condition was stipulated that the assessee had to pay any amount if the contract was rescinded, the Assessing Officer was rightly justified in disallowing said amount as expenditure. As regards commission payment, since no concrete evidence was placed to believe the version of the assessee, the Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing the expenditure. (AY. 2004-05)
Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2026) 308 Taxman 1 (Telangana)(HC)
S. 48: Capital gains-Mode of Computation-Amount paid for termination of agreement-No legal obligation to pay the amount-Disallowance was affirmed-Commission paid-No evidence was produced-Disallowance was affirmed.[S. 260A]
Leave a Reply