9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1331 - HC - Income TaxAllowability of excess provision for warranty - tribunal holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction when excess provision towards warranty made in the previous years is not offered to tax by reversing the entries - Held that - Substantial questions of law are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER vs. M/s. ACER INDIA PVT. LTD. 2018 (6) TMI 1557 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT as decided in favour of assessee. Interest income inclusion in the eligible profits for computing deduction u/s. 80IB - Held that - Substantial question of law is covered by the judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of PANDIAN CHEMICALS LTD., vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2003 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT AND Liberty India ltd., vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2009 (8) TMI 63 - SUPREME COURT . Decided in favour of revenue.
Issues:
1. Allowability of excess provision for warranty as deduction. 2. Entitlement for deduction of excess provision towards warranty not offered to tax. 3. Inclusion of interest income in eligible profits for deduction u/s. 80IB when not derived from eligible business. Issue 1: Allowability of Excess Provision for Warranty as Deduction: The appeal raised questions regarding the correctness of the Tribunal's decision to allow excess provision for warranty as a deduction without being based on past experience or scientific methods. The Court referred to the Apex Court's decision in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62. The Court noted that a similar issue was addressed in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER vs. M/s. ACER INDIA PVT. LTD., where the Court ruled in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the Court answered the first and second substantial questions of law in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. Issue 2: Entitlement for Deduction of Excess Provision Towards Warranty Not Offered to Tax: The second issue involved the correctness of the Tribunal's decision to allow the assessee a deduction for excess provision towards warranty that was not offered to tax in previous years. The Court relied on the judgment in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62. Following the precedent set in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER vs. M/s. ACER INDIA PVT. LTD., the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, answering the second substantial question of law in their favor and against the revenue. Issue 3: Inclusion of Interest Income in Eligible Profits for Deduction u/s. 80IB: The final issue pertained to the inclusion of interest income of a specific amount in the eligible profits for computing deduction under section 80IB of the Act, even though the interest income was not derived from the eligible business. The Court referred to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of PANDIAN CHEMICALS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (262 ITR 278) and liberty india ltd. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (317 ITR 218). Based on these judgments, the Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, answering the third substantial question of law in favor of the Revenue. In conclusion, the Court addressed and resolved all three substantial questions of law raised in the appeal. The first and second issues were decided in favor of the assessee, while the third issue was decided in favor of the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of accordingly.
|
