<?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>2016 (1) TMI 782 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270990</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, allowing the provision for warranty expenses as a deductible business expenditure for AY 2006-07 and AY 2007-08. The Tribunal emphasized that the provision was made systematically and scientifically, based on past experience and future expectations, in line with the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent. The revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, confirming that such expenses, incurred or likely to be incurred within the warranty period, are deductible as business expenditure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:55:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 782 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270990</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, allowing the provision for warranty expenses as a deductible business expenditure for AY 2006-07 and AY 2007-08. The Tribunal emphasized that the provision was made systematically and scientifically, based on past experience and future expectations, in line with the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent. The revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, confirming that such expenses, incurred or likely to be incurred within the warranty period, are deductible as business expenditure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270990</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>