<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (6) TMI 58 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213738</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld that provisions for warranty based on scientific study and past history are allowable, provided they meet certain criteria. The additional provision for warranty on domestic sales was deemed unjustified as it lacked a reliable estimate. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant&#039;s method of calculating warranty provisions was adequate and dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039; decision. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no substantial question of law identified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 16:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 58 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213738</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld that provisions for warranty based on scientific study and past history are allowable, provided they meet certain criteria. The additional provision for warranty on domestic sales was deemed unjustified as it lacked a reliable estimate. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant&#039;s method of calculating warranty provisions was adequate and dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039; decision. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no substantial question of law identified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>