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 366,470 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 115JB Section 14A Section 147 Section 234C Section 40(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

section 35d enduring benefit section 32(1)put to use block of assets section 40(a)(i)intangible assets mercantile system of accounting section 35 section 37(1)section 32 revenue expenditure

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

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. (Hudco), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1561/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e stamp duty being an ascertained liability, it was duly allowable in the year under consideration. He further relied on the judgment of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) and submitted that all the three elements mentioned in the said judgement, which constitute recognition of a provisional liability, were present in the case of the assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, ld. CIT (DR) relying on the findings of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the charges on which the depreciation has been claimed are in the nature of c…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1168/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e stamp duty being an ascertained liability, it was duly allowable in the year under consideration. He further relied on the judgment of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) and submitted that all the three elements mentioned in the said judgement, which constitute recognition of a provisional liability, were present in the case of the assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, ld. CIT (DR) relying on the findings of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the charges on which the depreciation has been claimed are in the nature of c…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1167/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e stamp duty being an ascertained liability, it was duly allowable in the year under consideration. He further relied on the judgment of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) and submitted that all the three elements mentioned in the said judgement, which constitute recognition of a provisional liability, were present in the case of the assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, ld. CIT (DR) relying on the findings of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the charges on which the depreciation has been claimed are in the nature of c…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1166/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e stamp duty being an ascertained liability, it was duly allowable in the year under consideration. He further relied on the judgment of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) and submitted that all the three elements mentioned in the said judgement, which constitute recognition of a provisional liability, were present in the case of the assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, ld. CIT (DR) relying on the findings of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the charges on which the depreciation has been claimed are in the nature of c…

M/S. Housing and Urban Development Corporation Ltd (Hudco), New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4303/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e stamp duty being an ascertained liability, it was duly allowable in the year under consideration. He further relied on the judgment of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) and submitted that all the three elements mentioned in the said judgement, which constitute recognition of a provisional liability, were present in the case of the assessee. 7.2 On the other hand, ld. CIT (DR) relying on the findings of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the charges on which the depreciation has been claimed are in the nature of c…

M/S Essilor India P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

ITA 227/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoit(Tp)A No.29/Bang/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) & It(Tp)A No.227/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Essilor India Pvt.Ltd. No.71/1, Brigade Plaza, 6Th Floor, S C Road, Gandhinagar, Bangalore-9. … Appellant Pan:Aaace 4623 J Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(3), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Ramasubramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234C

…favour with the submission of the assessee-company and directed the AO to allow the same. The ground relating to warranty expenditure was allowed by the ld.DRP following the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls P. Ltd. reported in 314 ITR 62. On the issue of product launch expenditure, the DRP held that the expenditure was in the nature of revenue and directed the AO to allow the same. On the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.60,98,834/-, the disallowance was confirmed by the DRP on the ground that the assessee-company had failed to maintain separate accounts in respect of tax exemp…

M/S Dell International Services India Private vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/295/2015HC Karnataka03 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 143(3)Section 260

…ITA 449 and 1039/2008. This Court by order dated 26.09.2012 remanded the matter back to the Tribunal. The Judgment of this Court reads thus: “The Supreme court in the case of Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-Tax reported [2009] 314 ITR 62(SC) has held in para-10 that the provision for warranty could be made is permissible if the requirements stated in para-10 are fulfilled. In that view of the matter, the appeals are allowed and the common order dated 16.11.2007 passed in ITA No.363/BNG/2007 and ITA No.362/BNG/2007 and the order dated 06.06.2008 passed in ITA No.…

Crompton Greaves Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT -6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 2836/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar"ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" । आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1994/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2836/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Crompton Greaves बनाम/ Cit – 6,Mumbai, Ltd.,6Th Floor, C.G. House, 5Th Floor, V. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 030. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc3840K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep N. Kapasi Revenue By : Shri C.W. Angolkar सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2016

For Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar

Section 143(3)Section 263

…n accordance with the settled law. In support, the assessee company relied upon the following decisions:- i) CIT v. Vintec Corpn. (P) Ltd. (2005) 146 taxman 313 (Delhi)(HC) ITA 1994Mum/13 & ITA 2836/Mum/14 7 ii) Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) iii) CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd, (2012) 349 ITR 610 (Karn)(HC) iv) CIT v. Nokia Siemens Networks India (P) Ltd. (2011) 14 taxmann.com 84 (Kar )(HC). The assessee company further submitted that in the earlier years , this expenditure was claimed and allowed by the A.O.. Therefore, there is no reason for taking a different view for this a…

Exide Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 189/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 40Section 90(2)

…available on record. As rightly submitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, this issue is covered in principle in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (Pvt.) Limited –vs.- CIT reported in 314 ITR 62, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the provision of warranty is allowable as deduction if the following conditions are satisfied:- (i) An Enterprise has a present obligation as a result of past events; I.T.A. No. 189/KOL./2007 Assessment year: 2003-2004 & I.T.A. No. 1414/KOL/2007 Assessment Year : 2004-2005 Page 5 of 22 (ii) It is pr…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Ltd

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA/902/2008HC Karnataka19 Jan 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 10ASection 260Section 260A

…ucing the any proff?. Re. question No.1: 4. Sri K V Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the revenue placing reliance on the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax reported in ((2009) 314 ITR 62) wherein, the assessee herein was also a party would strongly contend that, What is a provision is elaborately considered by the Apex Court and the parameters are set-out by the Apex Court to examine the recognition of provision for the purposes of the Act. The three Conditions to be satisfied for the recognition of the provision are:…

DCIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. M/S. Bch Electric Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1538/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate

…expenses are clearly allowable expenditure; the appellant relied upon a numbers of decisions of the various High Courts and Supreme Court. My attention was drawn to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Control India Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC) where in it has been held that such estimated provisions for warranty as an allowable expenses. In this case the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a case where there was warranty obligation such obligation was part of the sale price and should attach to the sale price of the product. Warranty obligation is a present obligation as a result pa…

DCIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. M/S. Bch Electric Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1537/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate

…expenses are clearly allowable expenditure; the appellant relied upon a numbers of decisions of the various High Courts and Supreme Court. My attention was drawn to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Control India Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC) where in it has been held that such estimated provisions for warranty as an allowable expenses. In this case the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a case where there was warranty obligation such obligation was part of the sale price and should attach to the sale price of the product. Warranty obligation is a present obligation as a result pa…

Natvar Parikh & Co.P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2283/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2146&2147/Mum/2009 & Ita No.2283/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07 To 2008-09) M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai- 400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2986/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Acit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Vs. M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai-400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P.Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008- 09. 2. In Asessee’S Appeal (I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Mahindra Holidays, 40 DTR 1, wherein after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D.Sasoon, 26 ITR 27, Madras Industrial Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802, Calcutta Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 and in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., 314 ITR 62, it was held that membership fee received for 33/25 years was liable to spread over the period of time for which such fee is received. Respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to tax 1/25th share of fee in each year, rather than taxing the entire sum in the year of receipt itself. 9. In the appeal filed by the revenue (i.e. ITA No.2986/Mu…

ACIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Natwar Parikh & Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2986/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2146&2147/Mum/2009 & Ita No.2283/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07 To 2008-09) M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai- 400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2986/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Acit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Vs. M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai-400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P.Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008- 09. 2. In Asessee’S Appeal (I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Mahindra Holidays, 40 DTR 1, wherein after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D.Sasoon, 26 ITR 27, Madras Industrial Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802, Calcutta Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 and in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., 314 ITR 62, it was held that membership fee received for 33/25 years was liable to spread over the period of time for which such fee is received. Respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to tax 1/25th share of fee in each year, rather than taxing the entire sum in the year of receipt itself. 9. In the appeal filed by the revenue (i.e. ITA No.2986/Mu…

Natvar Parikh & Company Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy.C.I.T., Central Circle 40, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2147/MUM/2009[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2146&2147/Mum/2009 & Ita No.2283/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07 To 2008-09) M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai- 400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2986/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Acit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Vs. M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai-400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P.Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008- 09. 2. In Asessee’S Appeal (I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Mahindra Holidays, 40 DTR 1, wherein after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D.Sasoon, 26 ITR 27, Madras Industrial Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802, Calcutta Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 and in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., 314 ITR 62, it was held that membership fee received for 33/25 years was liable to spread over the period of time for which such fee is received. Respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to tax 1/25th share of fee in each year, rather than taxing the entire sum in the year of receipt itself. 9. In the appeal filed by the revenue (i.e. ITA No.2986/Mu…

Natvar Parikh & Company Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy.C.I.T., Central Circle 40, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2146/MUM/2009[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2146&2147/Mum/2009 & Ita No.2283/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07 To 2008-09) M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai- 400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.2986/Mum/2009 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Acit, Cc-40, Mumbai-20 Vs. M/S Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 96, Chembur Mankhurd Link Road, Shivaji Nagar, Mumbai-400043 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 2937 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P.Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008- 09. 2. In Asessee’S Appeal (I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Singh

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Mahindra Holidays, 40 DTR 1, wherein after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D.Sasoon, 26 ITR 27, Madras Industrial Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802, Calcutta Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 and in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., 314 ITR 62, it was held that membership fee received for 33/25 years was liable to spread over the period of time for which such fee is received. Respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to tax 1/25th share of fee in each year, rather than taxing the entire sum in the year of receipt itself. 9. In the appeal filed by the revenue (i.e. ITA No.2986/Mu…

Galderma India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5734/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak

…m of accounting. Assessee company has also provided details of provisions made and actual 3 Galderma India Pvt Ltd claim made from F.Y. 2000 onwards and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (314 ITR 62) wherein, Hon'ble Apex court observed that any provision which can be measured by using in substantial degree of estimation, such liability cannot be said to be provision for contingent liability and it should be treated on par with ascertained liability. 6. Learned CIT(A) however rejected the claim of the assessee, consistent with the view taken…

M/S New Mangalore Port Trust, Mangalore vs. ACIT, Mangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1299/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boazm/S.New Mangalore Port Trust, Panambur, Mangalore. … Appellant Pan:Aaaln0057A Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Mangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V.Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chandana Ramachandran, CIT(DR)

…occur is uncertain. As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court has also used the words "contingent liability" for warranty expense and allowed deduction in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2009) 223 CTR (SC) 425 : (2009) 23 DTR (SC) 79 : (2009) 314 ITR 62 (SC) at 75. Therefore, coming back to the point of making provision, even if the assessee had chosen to provide for the liability in every year to comply with the matching concept, it would have been wholly unscientific and arbitrary. At this juncture, when we are making the observation that the assessee has incurred a liability to provide accommo…

ACIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Acer India P. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1179/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT, DR-I

…rience and industry trends and not on adhoc basis. The assessee has not changed the method of computing the warranty provision and it has been followed consistently. 11.3 The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. 314 ITR 62 would be squarely applicable to the facts of the case. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that provision made on past experience is a scientific method and is the most appropriate method. The relevant extract of the decision is provided below:- 11 IT(TP)A Nos.1179 & 1180(B)12 ‘In this case, we are concerned with Product Warranties. To give an ex…

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

Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1136/BANG/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri. K. P. Kumar, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. I. P. S. Bindra, CIT-DR-I

…ITA.1136 & 1134/Bang/2014 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'A', BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.1136/Bang/2014 (Assessment Year : 2002-03) Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU), Bangalore ..Appellant v. M/s. Hewlett Packard India Sales P. Ltd, (Erstwhile Hewlett Packard India P. Ltd), 24, Salarpuria Arena, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore ..Respondent PAN : AAACC9862F I.T.A No.1134/Bang/2014 (Assessment Year : 2002-03) (By the Assessee) Assessee by : Shri. K. P. Kumar, Sr. Counsel Revenue by : Shri. I. P. S…