https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276524 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the provision for warranty. The Tribunal held that the provision was justifiable, based on past experience and industry practices, and should not have been disallowed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal emphasized that the provision for warranty was not a contingent liability but an ascertained liability, crystallizing at the time of sale. Previous decisions in the assessee's own case and the Supreme Court decision were cited to support the claim, leading to the deletion of the disallowance and the overall success of the appeal. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Nov 2018 12:03:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276524 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the provision for warranty. The Tribunal held that the provision was justifiable, based on past experience and industry practices, and should not have been disallowed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal emphasized that the provision for warranty was not a contingent liability but an ascertained liability, crystallizing at the time of sale. Previous decisions in the assessee's own case and the Supreme Court decision were cited to support the claim, leading to the deletion of the disallowance and the overall success of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276524