AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
@
K.S. Jhaveri, J.—By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 12.4.2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1234/Ahd/1999 for AY 1996-97.
While admitting this appeal on 15.11.2000, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law:
"Whether the ITAT was justified in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 98,24,911/- made on account of provision of warranty which is in the nature of contingent liability?"
The facts of the present case are that the return of income declaring not taxable income of Rs. 43,95,800/- was filed by the assessee as on 31.10.1996. The same was processed under sec. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act. Thereafter, the case was selected for sample scrutiny by issuing notice under sec. 143(2) of the Act, which was duly served upon the assessee and detailed questionnaire calling for various details along with notice under sec. 142(1) was issued to the assessee. In response to the same, the assessee filed various details and documents as called for. After considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. Against the said assessment order, an appeal before the CIT(A) has been preferred by the assessee, which was partly allowed. Against the said order of CIT(A), an appeal before the ITAT has been preferred by the assessee which was also partly allowed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the ITAT, the Revenue has preferred present Tax Appeal before this Court.
Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considered the submissions. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent has contended that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai, . The learned advocate appearing for the appellant is not in a position to dispute the same. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, no elaborate reasons are given and the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The present Tax Appeal is dismissed.