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 367,154 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

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1773/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…The provisions for gratuity and leave encashment are recognized liabilities, determined scientifically for services rendered by employees during the relevant period. In the landmark judgment in case of Bharat Earth Movers v. Commissioner of Income-Tax [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a liability arising from an obligation that has already accrued, though the payment may ITA No.1772/Ahd/2015 and other 8 appeals Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. vs. ACIT-DCIT (by Assessee and Revenue) Asst. Years : 2002-03 to 2007-08 79 be deferred, is not a contingent liability. Such liabilities, if…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1772/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…The provisions for gratuity and leave encashment are recognized liabilities, determined scientifically for services rendered by employees during the relevant period. In the landmark judgment in case of Bharat Earth Movers v. Commissioner of Income-Tax [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a liability arising from an obligation that has already accrued, though the payment may ITA No.1772/Ahd/2015 and other 8 appeals Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. vs. ACIT-DCIT (by Assessee and Revenue) Asst. Years : 2002-03 to 2007-08 79 be deferred, is not a contingent liability. Such liabilities, if…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Ballari vs. Sha Ganeshmal Jewarraj Bohra, Koppal

In the result, both the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1202/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar E., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115BSection 131Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sha Ganeshmal Jewarraj Bohra, Ward 1, 4-2-188, Jawahar Road, Ballari – 583 102. Koppal Bazar S.O., Koppal – 583 231. PAN: AAWFS 0750K APPELLANT RESPONDENT CO No.30/Bang/2024 [in ITA No.1202/Bang/2024] Assessment year : 2017-18 Sha Ganeshmal Jewarraj Bohra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Koppal – 583 231. Ward 1, PAN: AAWFS 0750K Ballari – 583 102. CROSS OBJECTOR RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Sridhar E., Jt.CIT(D…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Emami Agrotech Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1107/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

…id down to determine the character of such amounts 4 I.T.A. Nos. 1107 & 1097/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2015-16 Emami Agrotech Limted received as incentives/subsidies. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C.P. Limited –vs.- CIT [245 ITR 431], it is not the name given by the assesese or even by the revenue or anyone else that matters, but it is true character of the receipt that determines its taxability and being regarded as falling within the capital field or out of it. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponny Sugar & Chemicals Limited (supra), the nature of the re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Emami Agrotech Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1097/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

…id down to determine the character of such amounts 4 I.T.A. Nos. 1107 & 1097/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2015-16 Emami Agrotech Limted received as incentives/subsidies. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C.P. Limited –vs.- CIT [245 ITR 431], it is not the name given by the assesese or even by the revenue or anyone else that matters, but it is true character of the receipt that determines its taxability and being regarded as falling within the capital field or out of it. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponny Sugar & Chemicals Limited (supra), the nature of the re…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi vs. Genpact India Now Merged With Genpact India Pvt. Ltd.), Haryana

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6773/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 10ASection 10A(4)

…during the year. This categorical finding has been followed by the ld. CIT(A) for the year under consideration also. Hence, assessee’s case squarely falls within the ratio decidendi of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Insilco Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 322 (Del.) 9.6 The ld. AR before us relied on the CBDT Circular no. 12 of 2022 dated 16.06.2022 wherein vide question no. 4 in response to a specific query raised, the CBDT had replied that discounts allowed to customers would only represent lesser real…

Genpact India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6582/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 10ASection 10A(4)

…during the year. This categorical finding has been followed by the ld. CIT(A) for the year under consideration also. Hence, assessee’s case squarely falls within the ratio decidendi of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Insilco Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 322 (Del.) 9.6 The ld. AR before us relied on the CBDT Circular no. 12 of 2022 dated 16.06.2022 wherein vide question no. 4 in response to a specific query raised, the CBDT had replied that discounts allowed to customers would only represent lesser real…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7, Delhi vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA-551/2023HC Delhi30 Sept 2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 260A

…n under section 37 is no longer res integra in the light of a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vinitec Corpn (P.) Ltd, 278 ITR 337. This Court has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 and Commissioner of Inland Revenue v. Mitsubishi Motors New Zealand Ltd., 222 ITR 697 held that the liability arising out of a warranty is an allowable deduction even when the amount payable by the assessee is quantified and discharged in future. The following passage from the above decision is in this regard apposite: “The ratio decidendi…

M/S International Seaport Dredging Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1284/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1284/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. International Seaport Dredging Dcit Private Limited Corporate Circle-2(2), P.No. 2C, 1St Floor, Ocean Square Chennai-34. बनाम/ South Phase, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Vs. Estate, Ekkattuthangal Guindy Industrial Estate, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabci-2286-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ashik Shah (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Shah (CA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 37

…liability only which could not be allowed as per the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Telangana in the case of M/s. Healthware Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 443 of 2005) which considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers (245 ITR 428). In the decision of Bharat Earth Movers, it was held that if a business liability has arisen in the accounting year, then the deduction thereof should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. What should be certain is the incurring of the liability. It should be capable of being estimated with…

Rotomag Motors and Controls Private Limited, Anand vs. The ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 666/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 666/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) िनधा"रण वष" बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Rotomag Motors & Assistant Commissioner Controls Private Of Income Tax Vs. Limited Anand Circle Phase Iv, 2102-3, B/H. R K Metal, V.U. Nagar, Anand – 388121, Gujarat "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr9061K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Shailesh J. Shah, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. Dr 22/08/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2024

For Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

…easonable estimation. • Rotork Controls India Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC): Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed a provision for warranty expenses where it was based on past data and made using a reliable estimation method. • Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC): Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a business liability, if based on a reasonable estimate and historical data, should be allowed as a deduction even if the exact outflow occurs in a future period. 10. The AR emphasised that the warranty provision of Rs. 1,14,19,990/- made for AY 2017-18 was reversed in AY 2021-22 to the extent of Rs. ITA No…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Mawana Sugar Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3498/DEL/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: him in the Memorandum of Appeal. 4.1 That on facts and in law the AO erred in ado tin the figure of Taxable Capital Gains at Rs.6,98,80,603/- instead of Rs.6,90,79,603/-.

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 43B

…At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice findings of the AO & ld. CIT (A) and submitted that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earthmovers Ltd. vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). 18. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 19. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earthmovers Ltd. (supra) and Hon’ble Supreme Court…

Mawana Sugars Limited., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 4519/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 43B

…At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice findings of the AO & ld. CIT (A) and submitted that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earthmovers Ltd. vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). 18. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 19. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earthmovers Ltd. (supra) and Hon’ble Supreme Court…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai

ITA 1533/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

…rds pension liability is not admissible under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act as these provisions are in respect of contingent liabilities. 13.5 The learned PCIT erred in not following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers (245 ITR 428) on the above issue that had been relied on by the Bank. 13.6 The learned PCIT erred in not following the judgement of the jurisdictional Mumbai ITAT in Bank's own case [erstwhile State Bank of Saurashtra which has since merged with the Bank) for AY 2009-10 and also for AY 2008-09 in the case of State Bank of India. Accordingly, the Issue is wel…

M/S Syndicate Bank, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Udupi

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1219/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115JSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…nt is not the date of signing the agreement nor the date of approval granted by the DRE, what is important is the effective (late of commencement. The Tribunal, while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the ease of "Bharat Earth vs. CIT" 245 ITR 428, held that in such a case the incurring of liability was certain and the same could also be estimated with reasonable certainty, although, the actual quantification may not be possible. In the case in hand also as per the agreement and the policy, the wage revision was certain and it could have been reasonably estimated also. Hence, the provision…

Pathfinder Publishing Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle -16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…report, some important points to be kept in mind with regard to cash flow projections are also noted. At this point, we feel it proper to take note of two judgments of Hon'ble apex court rendered in the case of Bharat earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 112 Taxman 61/245 ITR 428 and in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 180 Taxman 422/314 ITR 62. In the first case, the issue in dispute was regarding estimation of future liability of leave encashment and it was held by Hon'ble apex court in this case that the liability should be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though the actual…

The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) -3, Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 7010/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon'Ble

…ion in overfunding) (5,08,60,000) 27. We find for every year the reduction of expenses claimed is based on valuation determined as per actuarial valuation. Therefore, the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [245 ITR 428] squarely apply on the facts of the case in Hand. There is no dispute that the excess payment made in the prior years to Employees Gratuity Fund is now been adjusted against the allowability of ₹.5,08,60,000/- arising for the financial year 2005-06. The contention of the Ld. DR is that the assessee itself had added the amount, is not accepted as…

DCIT (It) 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 4788/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon'Ble

…ion in overfunding) (5,08,60,000) 27. We find for every year the reduction of expenses claimed is based on valuation determined as per actuarial valuation. Therefore, the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [245 ITR 428] squarely apply on the facts of the case in Hand. There is no dispute that the excess payment made in the prior years to Employees Gratuity Fund is now been adjusted against the allowability of ₹.5,08,60,000/- arising for the financial year 2005-06. The contention of the Ld. DR is that the assessee itself had added the amount, is not accepted as…

M/S Rockbed Renovators Ltd., Bhopal vs. The PCIT-1, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 214/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore12 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirockbed Renovators Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 7-A, Panjabi Bagh Raisen Road Bhopal Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7151G Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 196CSection 263

…port of his contention he has relied upon following decisions: 1.Bengal Peerless Housing Devat. Co. Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income (Circle -7) (1), Kolkata (2019) 103 Taxmann 298 (Kolkata Trib) 2.Bharat Earth Movers v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) 112 Taxmann 61 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Alembic Glass Industries (Tax Appeal No. 729/201) 3.2 Further when the assessment order was subject to verification and approval at e-assessment centers by the higher authorities then the same cannot be held as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the ground of improper inquiry on t…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. M/S Care Health Insurance Limited (Earlier Known As M/S Religare Health Insurance Co. Ltd.)

ITA/304/2024HC Delhi30 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

Section 37

…me would be entitled to deduction out of the gross receipts for the accounting year during which the provision is made for the liability. 49. The same principle is laid down in the judgment of this Court in Bharat Earth Movers [(2000) 6 SCC 645 : (2000) 245 ITR 428] . In that case the assessee Company had formulated leave encashment scheme. It was held, following the judgment in Metal Box Co. of India [AIR 1969 SC 612 : (1969) 73 ITR 53] , that the provision made by the assessee for meeting the liability incurred under leave encashment scheme proportionate with the entitlement earned by the employees,…

Titan Company Limited 9Earstwhile Known As Titan Industries Limited), Krishnagiri vs. ACIT Ltu 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 518/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

…ard point lapse after a few years, the same is reversed and offered to tax and hence the entire transaction is revenue neutral. The ld.counsel also relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT, reported in [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC) ITA Nos.518, 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2020 and Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., vs. CIT,reported in 314 ITR 62(SC). 3.4 We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the assessee has given comparative figures i.e., opening balance of provisions, provision created for the year under considera…