9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan JUDGMENT T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) is directed against the order dated 22.12.2020 made in ITA.No.3155/Chny/2019 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for assessment year 2010-11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trol Ltd Vs CIT wherein it was clearly held that expenditure was allowable provided the provisions created was to be scientifically established which is not the case on hand as no details nor evidences were produced by the Assessee to substantiate its claim?" 3. We have heard heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant-Revenue and Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsel further relied on the decision of this Court in the case of CIT Vs. Forbes Campbell Finance Ltd., wherein the Division Bench had allowed the Revenue's Appeal. It is further submitted that in the instant case also, there is no scientific basis adopted by the assessee with regard to the provision made for the warranty claim. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant would contend that the decision of this Court in the case of Renowned Auto Products (supra) would bind this Court and the decision of the High Court of Karnataka will not be a binding precedent of this Court. 8. As a general proposition, the learned Senior Standing Counsel is right. However, the thin but marked difference is that the decision of the High Court of Karnataka is in the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
