9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent Tax Appeals assailing the following orders: Tax Appeal No. Date of Tribunal's order ITA/CO No. Assessment Year 1298 of 2008 14.03.2008 2555/Ahd/2004 2001-02 1758 of 2009 24.10.2008 2614/Ahd/2006 2003-04 1759 of 2009 24.10.2008 2834/Ahd/2006 2004-05 843 of 2014 14.02.2014 25/Ahd/2011 2007-08 29.10.2009 29.10.2009 2491/Ahd/2009 2006-07 2. These matters were admitted by this Court for consideration of the following substantial question of law: TAX APPEAL No. 1298 of 2008 Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,87,508/- being the provisions made for damaged goods for the current year and Rs. 25,95,833/- being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad 'Liability for damaged goods'. Mr. Nitin Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the revenue submitted that the Tribunal observed the issue is squarely covered by the decision in assessee's own case rendered for earlier years and the Tribunal allowed the appeal in terms of the order of the Tribunal in earlier years and the appeal of the revenue had been dismissed. He submitted that the contention that the Tribunal has decided the issue finally is not correct. He submitted that the decision relied by the Tribunal pertained to another assessment years and the same shall not be applicable to the years under consideration. 4. Mr. Mehta has drawn the attention of this Court to the order of Assessing Officer so far as Tax Appeal No. 1298 of 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penditure. For debiting the accounts for provisions of damaged goods the assessee has stated that the same was made in accordance with the notification issued by the Central Government which was effective from 1.4.97. According to it, the provisions should be made for all liabilities and losses even though the amount cannot be determined with certainty and represents only a best estimate in the light of the available information...... Thus, the company has to suffer the probable loss which may arise at the time of receipts of return of goods. Thus, the loss will accrue or arise only when the goods received back. So the incurring of loss is dependent upon the future events which would happen after any point of time from the end of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is in the nature of contingent liability. (II) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Hewlett Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd reported in [2014] 49 taxmann.com 166 (karnataka) whereby the Karnataka High Court has also relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd (supra) and held that provision made for warranty liability in respect of products sold is not a contingent liability but should be allowed as a revenue expense. 6. Heard learned advocates for both the sides. Mainly two issues have arisen from the present set of appeals namely (i) disallowance of the provision made for the current years under appeal and (ii) disallowance of actual liability pertaining to earlier years. So far as the issue with rega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
