CIT v. Jay Bee Industries

71 Taxmann 386Reported decision#25539 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2017.

Judgments citing CIT v. Jay Bee Industries

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5716/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…ITD 1] wherein it was held that the liability towards warranty is inbuilt in the sale prices itself and so the liability is not contingent but an ascertained one and to be allowed in the M/s. Kail Ltd. year of sales. In the case of CIT v. Jay Bee Industries [71 Taxmann 386] the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court held that provision of warranty for repairs/replacement is an existing liability at time of sale and is allowable as deduction. Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Tanking Ltd. v. ITO [120 ITD 237] held that Assessing Officer cannot make addition of provision of performance warranti…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1855/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…ITD 1] wherein it was held that the liability towards warranty is inbuilt in the sale prices itself and so the liability is not contingent but an ascertained one and to be allowed in the M/s. Kail Ltd. year of sales. In the case of CIT v. Jay Bee Industries [71 Taxmann 386] the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court held that provision of warranty for repairs/replacement is an existing liability at time of sale and is allowable as deduction. Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Tanking Ltd. v. ITO [120 ITD 237] held that Assessing Officer cannot make addition of provision of performance warranti…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4415/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen
Section 14A

…ITD 1] wherein it was held that the liability towards warranty is inbuilt in the sale prices itself and so the liability is not contingent but an ascertained one and to be allowed in the M/s. Kail Ltd. year of sales. In the case of CIT v. Jay Bee Industries [71 Taxmann 386] the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court held that provision of warranty for repairs/replacement is an existing liability at time of sale and is allowable as deduction. Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Tanking Ltd. v. ITO [120 ITD 237] held that Assessing Officer cannot make addition of provision of performance warranti…

CIT v. Jay Bee Industries (71 Taxmann 386) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax