Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

314 ITR 62Supreme Court of India2009#69 most cited

What is Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A provision for expenses, such as warranty, is a deductible liability for income tax purposes if it constitutes a present obligation arising from past events, and a reliable estimate of the amount of obligation is possible.

739

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 314 ITR 62 · Section 37(1) · provision for warranty expenses · allowability of provision · definition of liability · present obligation · reliable estimate · mercantile system of accounting · revenue expenditure deduction

Also reported as

223 CTR 425

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 147Section 234CSection 40(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

section 35denduring benefitsection 32(1)put to useblock of assetssection 40(a)(i)intangible assetsmercantile system of accountingsection 35section 37(1)section 32revenue expenditure

Judgments citing Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

At & T Communication Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1015/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2008-09 At&T Communication Services Acit, India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-3(2), Vatika Triangle, 3Rd Floor, New Delhi. Vs Sushant Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon-122002 (Pan: Aacca8033E) Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit, At&T Communication Services Circle-3(2), India Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 380B, Mohan Dev House, Vs Dc.R. Building, 13, Tolstoy Marg, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi. (Pan: Aacca8033E) Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms Poonam Ahuja, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bara, CIT DR
Section 153(1)Section 40

…isions made towards routine business expenditure incurred are based on past trends as well as scientific and reasonable basis and are liable to be allowed as deduction in view of the decisions rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. - 314 ITR 62. 21. The ld. AR for the taxpayer further contended that the issue is also covered by the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of AGNSI in ITA No.1059/Del/2015 for AY 2010-11. 22. Ld. DR for the Revenue contended that before the ld. DRP, the taxpayer has not produced any documentary evidence nor pressed the addition and moreover…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Continental India Ltd., Meerut

ITA 207/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Dr. M.L.Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Rihit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 37

…7. It is contended by the Ld. AR for assessee that in such situation provision has to be made on the basis of fair and scientific approach and relied upon decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case cited as Rotark Controls India Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC). It is further contended that Ld. AR for assessee that provision was made before auditing the financials of the assessee. It is further contended that in such like situation estimate has to be made on the basis of past event of sales which is worked out at 0.55% of the total turn over. 8. However on the other hand Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue…

Shri Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Oficer, Ward II(4), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 119/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR
Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR Before Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member And Sh. N. K. Choudhry, Judicial Member ITA No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 ITA No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 ITA No. 119/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Sh. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o S.K. Gupta & Co., Ward-II(2), Chartered Accountant, EG, 934, Jalandhar 2nd Floor, N.G. Road, Jalandhar-144001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADHPA5106D Assessee by : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR Date of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.…

Sh. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Prop., Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 38/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR
Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR Before Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member And Sh. N. K. Choudhry, Judicial Member ITA No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 ITA No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 ITA No. 119/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Sh. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o S.K. Gupta & Co., Ward-II(2), Chartered Accountant, EG, 934, Jalandhar 2nd Floor, N.G. Road, Jalandhar-144001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADHPA5106D Assessee by : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR Date of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.…

The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (India) Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 931/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.R.Soni, CIT-DR &
Section 80I

…ale price of the air conditioner comprises the warranty expenses. The provision for the warranty was made on a scientific basis which is accordingly allowable as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 62. 12.4. Without prejudice to the above, the assessee also claimed that if the provision for warranty expense is disallowed, then the corresponding income booked in the form of sales should also be allowed as a deduction in its proportion. ITA Nos.2399/Ahd/13, 2286/Ahd/14 & 860/Ahd/16 (Revenue) & 931/Ahd/2016 (by assessee) DCIT vs. Hitachi Home& L…

Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 860/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.R.Soni, CIT-DR &
Section 80I

…ale price of the air conditioner comprises the warranty expenses. The provision for the warranty was made on a scientific basis which is accordingly allowable as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 62. 12.4. Without prejudice to the above, the assessee also claimed that if the provision for warranty expense is disallowed, then the corresponding income booked in the form of sales should also be allowed as a deduction in its proportion. ITA Nos.2399/Ahd/13, 2286/Ahd/14 & 860/Ahd/16 (Revenue) & 931/Ahd/2016 (by assessee) DCIT vs. Hitachi Home& L…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (India) Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2286/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.R.Soni, CIT-DR &
Section 80I

…ale price of the air conditioner comprises the warranty expenses. The provision for the warranty was made on a scientific basis which is accordingly allowable as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 62. 12.4. Without prejudice to the above, the assessee also claimed that if the provision for warranty expense is disallowed, then the corresponding income booked in the form of sales should also be allowed as a deduction in its proportion. ITA Nos.2399/Ahd/13, 2286/Ahd/14 & 860/Ahd/16 (Revenue) & 931/Ahd/2016 (by assessee) DCIT vs. Hitachi Home& L…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solution(India) Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2399/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.R.Soni, CIT-DR &
Section 80I

…ale price of the air conditioner comprises the warranty expenses. The provision for the warranty was made on a scientific basis which is accordingly allowable as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 62. 12.4. Without prejudice to the above, the assessee also claimed that if the provision for warranty expense is disallowed, then the corresponding income booked in the form of sales should also be allowed as a deduction in its proportion. ITA Nos.2399/Ahd/13, 2286/Ahd/14 & 860/Ahd/16 (Revenue) & 931/Ahd/2016 (by assessee) DCIT vs. Hitachi Home& L…

M/S. Lexmark International (India) Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 14(1), Kolkata

ITA 1208/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

…and loss account. The Assessing Officer himself has been very fair in not disputing the liability of the impugned warranty claim based on past liability followed by scientific estimation allowable as a deduction as per hon'ble apex court’s decision in (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. vs. CIT. We find no merit in Revenue’s argument ITA No.1208/K/18, 89, 391/K/17 AYs 14-15, 07-08 M/s Lexmark International (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT/ACIT Cirl. 14(1) Kol. Page 6 therefore that impugned warranty provision is required to be disallowed only because the taxpayer has not routed the same through its profi…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Lexmark International India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 89/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

…and loss account. The Assessing Officer himself has been very fair in not disputing the liability of the impugned warranty claim based on past liability followed by scientific estimation allowable as a deduction as per hon'ble apex court’s decision in (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. vs. CIT. We find no merit in Revenue’s argument ITA No.1208/K/18, 89, 391/K/17 AYs 14-15, 07-08 M/s Lexmark International (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT/ACIT Cirl. 14(1) Kol. Page 6 therefore that impugned warranty provision is required to be disallowed only because the taxpayer has not routed the same through its profi…

M/S. Lexmark International (India) Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle 14(1), Kolkata

ITA 391/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

…and loss account. The Assessing Officer himself has been very fair in not disputing the liability of the impugned warranty claim based on past liability followed by scientific estimation allowable as a deduction as per hon'ble apex court’s decision in (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. vs. CIT. We find no merit in Revenue’s argument ITA No.1208/K/18, 89, 391/K/17 AYs 14-15, 07-08 M/s Lexmark International (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT/ACIT Cirl. 14(1) Kol. Page 6 therefore that impugned warranty provision is required to be disallowed only because the taxpayer has not routed the same through its profi…

Sew Eurpdrive India Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT., Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1542/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1542/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Sew Eurodrive India Private Limited, D.C.I.T, Plot No.4, Gidc Por Raman Gamdi, Circle-2(1)(1), Vs. Vadodara-391243. Baroda

…entific basis of calculation of provision for warranty both before the learned AO as well as the learned CIT(A). Also, the learned CIT(A) erred in law by mentioning that decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Rotork Controls India Private Limited v. CIT 314 ITR 62 is not applicable in appellant's case. 2.2. The learned CIT(A) as well as the learned AO failed to understand accounting treatment done by the appellant in its books of accounts in connection with provisions for warranty. Also, they failed to appreciate that even alternate treatment suggested by them was followed by the appellant would have result…

The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara vs. M/S. Vadodara Enviro Channel Project Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 766/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.766/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri M.S.A. Khan, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Shah, AR
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 4(1)Section 5(1)(a)Section 5(1)(b)Section 9(1)(i)

…part of the assessee not only to provide accommodation but also to provide other incidental services attached with the accommodation. Hon. Special Bench then referred to the decision of Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC) wherein it is observed that liability is defined as a present obligation arising from past events, the The ACIT vs. M/s.Vadodara Enviro Channel Project Ltd. Asst.Year – 2012-13 settlement of which is expected to result in an outflow from the enterprise of resources embodying economic benefits. It was further observed that a past event that le…

Fujitsu India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1981/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblefujitsu India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Building No. 9B, Phase- Income-Tax Iii, Dlf Cyber City Circle 9 (2) Gurgaon Aaacf4170D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…but the Assessing Officer did not ask any further queries. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer did not give any opportunity to the assessee company to prove the claim. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Rotork Controls India Ltd. vs. CIT 314 ITR 62. 11. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the TPO/AO and the directions of the DRP. 12. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. The assessee company’s submissions were not properly taken into account by the Assessing Officer during the Assessment Proceedings while deciding the provision for warrant…

Joint Commssioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore vs. Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 1137/BANG/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. H.P. India Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Hewelett-Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd.), 24, Salarpuria Arenam Hosur Main Road, Bengaluru-560 030. … Appellant Pan:Aaacc9862F Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru. … Respondent & (By Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca. Revenue By : Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 07/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/02/2019 O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Ltu, Bengaluru, Dated 30/06/2014 For The Assessment Years 2002-03 & 2003-04. Since The Issues Are Common In Both The Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 200(1)Section 394Section 40Section 40a

…O was directed to look into that aspect afresh. 3. The assessee filed M.P. No. 112/Bang/2016 pointing out that the issue with regard to provisions for warranty was already considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. (314 ITR 62) and the assessee was also a part of the group of cases which were decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The assessee also pointed out that in assessee’s own case, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Assessment Year 2003-04, had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. ITA No.1135 & 1137/Bang/20114 Page 8 of 26 4. The Tribunal vide its order…

Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Joint Commssioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

ITA 1135/BANG/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. H.P. India Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Hewelett-Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd.), 24, Salarpuria Arenam Hosur Main Road, Bengaluru-560 030. … Appellant Pan:Aaacc9862F Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru. … Respondent & (By Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca. Revenue By : Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 07/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/02/2019 O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Ltu, Bengaluru, Dated 30/06/2014 For The Assessment Years 2002-03 & 2003-04. Since The Issues Are Common In Both The Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 200(1)Section 394Section 40Section 40a

…O was directed to look into that aspect afresh. 3. The assessee filed M.P. No. 112/Bang/2016 pointing out that the issue with regard to provisions for warranty was already considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. (314 ITR 62) and the assessee was also a part of the group of cases which were decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The assessee also pointed out that in assessee’s own case, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Assessment Year 2003-04, had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. ITA No.1135 & 1137/Bang/20114 Page 8 of 26 4. The Tribunal vide its order…

The ACIT, Circle-7(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Udaykumar C. Patel, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2300/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1735 & 2300/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Acit, Udaykumar C. Patel, बनाम/ Circle – 7(2), Prop. Line O Matic Vs. Ahmedabad. Graphics Industries, D/62 Diamond Park, Gidc Estate, Opp. Toyota Show Room, Naroda, Ahmedabad – 382 330. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aatpp 8316 R .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri A. S. Shah, A.R.

For Respondent: Shri A. S. Shah, A.R
Section 145A

…ses of Rs.38,64,718/- against the provision made of Rs.18,86,570/-. This shows that the contention of the appellant was actually for an ascertainable liability, is correct. 5.2.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 has held that warranty provision is allowable as a deduction. 5.2.2 In view of these facts and the discussion above as also the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the addition of Rs.18,86,570/- is deleted. Ground of appeal no. 2 is allowed.” Being aggrieved by the order of ld CIT(A) revenue is in appeal before us. ITA Nos.1735 & 2300/Ahd/20…

The ACIT, Circle-7(2), Ahmedabad vs. Udaykumar C. Patel, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1735/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1735 & 2300/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Acit, Udaykumar C. Patel, बनाम/ Circle – 7(2), Prop. Line O Matic Vs. Ahmedabad. Graphics Industries, D/62 Diamond Park, Gidc Estate, Opp. Toyota Show Room, Naroda, Ahmedabad – 382 330. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aatpp 8316 R .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri A. S. Shah, A.R.

For Respondent: Shri A. S. Shah, A.R
Section 145A

…ses of Rs.38,64,718/- against the provision made of Rs.18,86,570/-. This shows that the contention of the appellant was actually for an ascertainable liability, is correct. 5.2.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 has held that warranty provision is allowable as a deduction. 5.2.2 In view of these facts and the discussion above as also the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the addition of Rs.18,86,570/- is deleted. Ground of appeal no. 2 is allowed.” Being aggrieved by the order of ld CIT(A) revenue is in appeal before us. ITA Nos.1735 & 2300/Ahd/20…

Rasna Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT., Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal ITA 2334/Ahd/2015 filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2334/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Sl. ITA/CO A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1 2334/Ahd/2015 2010-11 Rasna Pvt. Ltd. DCIT, Ahmedabad Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad 2 2397/Ahd/2015 2010-11 ACIT, Circle-5, Rasna Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad 3 3666/Ahd/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Rasna Pvt. Ltd. Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad 4 CO No. 2011-12 Rasna Pvt. Ltd. DCIT, 04/Ahd/2016 Ahmedabad Circle-3(1)(2), (In ITA No. Ahmedabad 3666/Ahd/2015) 5 3667/Ahd/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Rasna Pvt. Ltd. Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad…

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 8926/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Gulati
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.8926/Mum./2010 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) Tata Motors Ltd. Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street ……………. Appellant Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai 400 001 PAN – AAACT2727Q v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(3), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari Revenue by : Shri C.S. Gulati Date of Hearing – 30.10.2018 Date of Order – 28.01.2019 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the…