{"id":65182,"date":"2026-10-30T10:13:32","date_gmt":"2026-10-30T04:43:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/g-h-reddy-associates-construction-p-ltd-v-ito-2026-310-taxman-182-telhc\/"},"modified":"2026-10-30T10:13:32","modified_gmt":"2026-10-30T04:43:32","slug":"g-h-reddy-associates-construction-p-ltd-v-ito-2026-310-taxman-182-telhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/g-h-reddy-associates-construction-p-ltd-v-ito-2026-310-taxman-182-telhc\/","title":{"rendered":"G.H.Reddy &#038; Associates (Construction) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2026) 310 Taxman 182 (Tel)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee-contractor was awarded a canal construction contract by KBJNL. Disputes arose leading to arbitration, in which assessee\u2019s claim was allowed. District Court partly confirmed the arbitral award. In KBJNL\u2019s appeal, the Karnataka High Court stayed operation of the District Court\u2019s order and directed KBJNL to deposit \u20b93 crores as an interim measure, which KBJNL deposited (excluding TDS) in the assessee\u2019s account during pendency of appeal. Assessing Officer treated \u20b93 crores as revenue receipt taxable in the year of receipt. Tribunal affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal, the Court held that the amount deposited pursuant to the interim order of the Karnataka High Court could not be treated as revenue receipt taxable in the year of receipt since the assessee\u2019s right to receive had not crystallised and would be taxable only when the dispute was finally resolved in assessee\u2019s favour. (AY. 2006-07)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Arbitral award-Deduction of tax at source-Amount deposited pursuant to interim order of Karnataka High Court-Right to receive had not crystallised and would be taxable only when dispute was finally resolved in assessee\u2019s favour-Order of Tribunal set aside. [S. 145, 260A] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65182","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gXk","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65182","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65182"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65182\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":65183,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65182\/revisions\/65183"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65182"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65182"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65182"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}