Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

245 ITR 428Supreme Court of India2000#52 most cited

What is Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT authority for?

A business liability that has definitely arisen in an accounting year is deductible even if it needs to be quantified and discharged later, as long as its incurring is certain and can be reasonably estimated.

901

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2006 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Bharat Earth Movers v CIT · 245 ITR 428 · ascertainable liability · unascertainable liability · accrued liability · provision for expenses · deduction · accounting year · future discharge

Also reported as

112 Taxmann 616 SCC 645162 CTR 325

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 40(a)(ia)Section 195Section 148Section 1961
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35dmercantile system of accountingenduring benefitintangible assetssection 40(a)(i)section 35revenue expenditurebook profitssection 37(1)section 115jbamalgamationsection 37

Judgments citing Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

Maharashtra State Electricity Transmisson Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addll .CIT - RG. 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2942/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. AR
Section 250

…State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. ITA no.2782/Mum./2015 ITA no.2942/Mum./2015 Fund liability. As the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers v/s CIT, [2000] 112 Taxmann 61 (SC), which has rightly been followed by the learned CIT(A,) such a liability which has arisen during the year under consideration is allowable even though the same may have to be discharged at a future date. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, ground no.5, r…

ACIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2782/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. AR
Section 250

…State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. ITA no.2782/Mum./2015 ITA no.2942/Mum./2015 Fund liability. As the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers v/s CIT, [2000] 112 Taxmann 61 (SC), which has rightly been followed by the learned CIT(A,) such a liability which has arisen during the year under consideration is allowable even though the same may have to be discharged at a future date. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, ground no.5, r…

M/S. Biocon Limited, Bengaluru vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the legal issue raised in ground no

ITA 1858/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint M/S. Biocon Ltd., Commissioner Of 20Th Km, Hosur Road, Income-Tax, Electronic City, Large Tax Payers Bangalore – 560 100. Unit [Ltu], Pan: Aaacb7461R Vs. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For A.Y. 2010-11 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein Below Are Independent & Without Prejudice To The Other Grounds Preferred By The Appellant. 1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The ' Case & In Law, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals ["Cit(A)"] Dated March 28, 2018 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") For Ay 2010-11 To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Facts & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Scope Of Re-Assessment Proceedings

For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha
Section 147Section 250Section 35

…abilities on account of foreign currency translations. 5.3 That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in disregarding the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) (245 ITR 428) (SC) and the Hon'ble Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Wipro GE Medical Systems Ltd v DCIT (81 77'J 455) wherein it was held that a liability is not contingent, if the liability should be certain to be incurred; and the liability should be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty even though the quantification may not be possible. 5.…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Next Education India Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1413/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri S. Raghunathan, ARFor Respondent: Sri T. Sunil Goutam,DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…“6.3 I have carefully considered the assessment order and submissions made on this issue. On examination of the case laws referred by the AR, the pronouncements were made as follows :- The principle laid down in the case of Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 (SC) was that a liability definitely incurred by an assessee's deductible notwithstanding the fact that its quantification may take place in a later year. The mere fact that the quantification is not precisely possible at the time of incurring the liability would not make an ascertained liability a contingent. Almost to the similar…

M/S. Model Infra Corporation Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 11/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Model Infra Corporation Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant No. 6, Second Floor, Smk Commissioner Of Chambers, Income Tax, First A Main Road, Circle – 1(1), Yelahanka New Town, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 064. Pan: Aadcm7125J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nitish Ranjan, Ca : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 29-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of Order Dated 25.10.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-4, Bangalore For A.Y. 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: Tax Effect Relating Grounds Of Appeal To Each Ground Of Appeal The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income- 1. Tax (Appeals) Is Opposed To Law, Facts & Na - Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Nitish Ranjan, CA
Section 36Section 36(2)

…ready pointed out this principle is to be applied keeping in view the principles of prudence and applicable Accounting Standards. In our opinion, the complete answer has been given long back by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd, 245 ITR 428 (SC), wherein, it was held that the provision made by the assessee for meeting the liability incurred by it under the leave encashment scheme proportionate with the entitlement earned by the employees of the company was entitled to deduction out of the gross receipts of the accounting year in which the provisions were made. 55. Ld CIT D.R. has al…

Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 12, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3348/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Neetika Bansal, CIT- DR
Section 115JSection 30Section 32Section 37(1)

…gratuity and leave encashment were created scientifically on the basis of actuarial valuation and, therefore, in the nature of ascertained liability. Strong reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428 and in the case of Metal Box Company of India Ltd 73 ITR 53. 10. Submissions of the assessee were duly considered by the Assessing Officer who was of the firm belief that though the actuarial valuation may be on scientific basis, but this does not make it actual ascertained liability. 10. Dismissing the claim of the assessee, the Assessing Of…

The ACIT RG 1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Associated Cement Co., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed while the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 5259/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2004-2005
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…bility determined on the basis of actuarial valuation after taking into consideration Paragraph 2(E)(ii) of Schedule O : Notes to Accounts, and placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT : (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC). 13.3. Revenue is in appeal, challenging the decision of CIT(A) of deletion of INR.1,88,97,500/-. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. While the Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order, the Authorised Representative of the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and r…

M/S. Acc Ltd ( Formely Known As the Associated Cememtn Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. The Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed while the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 4895/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2004-2005
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…bility determined on the basis of actuarial valuation after taking into consideration Paragraph 2(E)(ii) of Schedule O : Notes to Accounts, and placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT : (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC). 13.3. Revenue is in appeal, challenging the decision of CIT(A) of deletion of INR.1,88,97,500/-. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. While the Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order, the Authorised Representative of the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and r…

Sandhu Roadlines Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 10(2), Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2847/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2847/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sandhu Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., H.O. D-1 (B-Wing) 1St Floor, Ghanwat Plaza, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Pune- 410 501. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aalcs1536M बनधम / V/S. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ito, Ward 10(2), Pune

For Appellant: Shri Suniel R. KharbhariFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)

…s representing unascertained liability. Case law Chainrup Sampatram v/s CIT (1953) 24 ITR 481 (SC) holds that an expenditure could very well be booked at its first sign based on reasonable certainty. Their lordships further hold in Bharat Earth movers v/s CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC) that such an item in the nature of a provision could very well be claimed as deduction; based on reasonable estimation(s), 4 Sandhu Roadlines Pvt. Ltd although it is actually paid on a future date. We accordingly delete the assessee’s first disallowance of Rs.38,88,000/-in issue. 4. The factual position is no different qua the assessee’s t…

Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 452/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.452/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IT(TP)A No.452/Bang/2017 Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.452/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd. Ferns Icon, Level 2 Doddenakundi Village Marathahalli Outer Ring Road Deputy Commissioner of Marathahalli Post Vs. Income-tax K.R. Puram, Hobli Circle 4(1)(1) Bangalore 560 037 Bangalore PAN NO :AABCI3372H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.R. Respondent by : Shri T. Roumuan Paite, D.R. : Date of Heari…

Tanfac Industreis Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 242/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Karthik Mohan (Advocate) & ShriFor Respondent: Shri P Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 43B

…ough these pleadings have been set out in the impugned order, the same have not been considered. 4. The grounds of appeal filed before the Ld. Commissioner further stated that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT, 245 ITR 428, a claim for deduction on account of provision for leave salary, based on the method of actuarial variation, would have to be allowed. Although these pleadings have been set out in the impugned order, the same have not been considered. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the grounds of appeal filed before the Ld. Commissioner specifically states t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ntpc Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3194/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…there would have been a likelihood of the higher figure not being realized after tariff finalization. 21. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd v. CIT, (1985) 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd v. CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accounting period, which is payable at a future is permissibl…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ntpc Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3590/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…there would have been a likelihood of the higher figure not being realized after tariff finalization. 21. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd v. CIT, (1985) 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd v. CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accounting period, which is payable at a future is permissibl…

M/S. Ntpc Limited, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3535/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…there would have been a likelihood of the higher figure not being realized after tariff finalization. 21. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd v. CIT, (1985) 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd v. CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accounting period, which is payable at a future is permissibl…

M/S Chowgule and Company (Salt) Pvt. Ltd, Mormugao vs. The ACIT, Circle - 2, Margao

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

ITA 390/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

For Appellant: Ms Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

…eport, hence it shall be incorrect to state that liability since payable at future date has not incurred for the year under consideration. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Bharat Earth Movers Vs CIT” 245 ITR 428 (SC)., wherein the Hon’ble Lordship have observed that, what should be certain is the incurring of the liability and the fact that the same is capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty, although the actual quantification may not be possible and if the aforesaid requirements were satisfied, then the liability could not be held as a cont…

M/S. Indecomm Global Services (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2800/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 40

…arises in the hands of payee at the time of creation of provision, therefore no deduction of withholding tax required. iv) In this regard, appellant relies on the following judicial precedents:-  The SC in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) has held that if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed in respect of the same even though the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date.  In this regard, reliance can be placed on the ruling of Honorable High Court of Karnataka in the case of Karnataka Po…

M/S. Indecomm Global Services (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2799/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 40

…arises in the hands of payee at the time of creation of provision, therefore no deduction of withholding tax required. iv) In this regard, appellant relies on the following judicial precedents:-  The SC in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) has held that if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed in respect of the same even though the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date.  In this regard, reliance can be placed on the ruling of Honorable High Court of Karnataka in the case of Karnataka Po…

Wipro Finance Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed

C.A. No.-006677-006677 - 2008Supreme Court12 Apr 2022
Section 143(1)(a)Section 254Section 37Section 43A

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6677 OF 2008 WIPRO FINANCE LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX …RESPONDENTS O R D E R 1. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 2.4.2008 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in I.T.A. No. 633/2004. 2. Briefly stated, the appellant company submitted returns of income on 29.11.1997 for the assessment year 1997­1998, mentioning loss of income, amongst others, owing to exchange fluctuation of Rs.1,10,53,909/­. A…

JCIT, Bengaluru vs. M/S Abb Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1837/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Dilip, Advocate and Standing Counsel
Section 14A

…s provision for warranty. The AO came to the conclusion that the provision for warranty is a contingent liability and denied the claim of the assessee. On first appeal, the learned CIT(A), relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BEML (245 ITR 428)( concluded the issue in favour of the assessee. From the facts, it is seen that the assessee is under contractual obligation to provide warranty to their customers. The assessee has provided warranty on the supplies made. The liability to pay for warranty claim arises no sooner sales is effected. Therefore, the assessee had provided for liabilit…

Abb India Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Addl.C.I.T, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1808/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Dilip, Advocate and Standing Counsel
Section 14A

…s provision for warranty. The AO came to the conclusion that the provision for warranty is a contingent liability and denied the claim of the assessee. On first appeal, the learned CIT(A), relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BEML (245 ITR 428)( concluded the issue in favour of the assessee. From the facts, it is seen that the assessee is under contractual obligation to provide warranty to their customers. The assessee has provided warranty on the supplies made. The liability to pay for warranty claim arises no sooner sales is effected. Therefore, the assessee had provided for liabilit…