9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the common judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad ["Tribunal" for short] dated 31st May 2012. We may notice the questions framed in Tax Appeal No. 828 of 2012, which read as under:- (A) "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the decision of CIT(A) in deleting the addition made on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Micro Land Ltd. reported in 347 ITR 613 (Kar) 2012 ?" Brief issue is that the respondent-assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing mining machines and spares/components for re-sale and for own consumption. For the Assessment Year 2005-06, the assessee had claimed a Warranty liability of Rs. 48.61 lakhs [rounded off] on the sale of diffe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nreasonable. The Tribunal, by impugned order, relying on the decision in case of Rotork Control (India) Ltd. (supra)upheld the assessee's stand. Revenue has therefore, filed these appeals before us. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that in the present case, the assessee had not presented any scientific method of estimating its possible warranty liability. Making a provision for such lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal has committed any error in upholding the assessee's case for deduction. We do appreciate the anxiety of the learned counsel for the revenue that the assessee had not produced any scientific method for arriving at the estimation of the warranty liability We would have persuaded to examine this question further in light of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in case of Rotork Control (Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
