https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766163 The Bombay HC upheld ITAT's decision allowing insurance company's provisions for uncertain liabilities. The court distinguished between accrued and contingent liabilities, ruling that provisions based on actuarial valuation mandated by IRDA constitute present obligations, not contingent liabilities. Following SC precedents in Rotork Controls, Metal Box Company, and Bharat Earth Movers, the court held that scientifically calculated provisions meeting regulatory requirements cannot be treated as unascertained liabilities. The AO's approach contradicted established law in General Insurance Corporation case. The court noted consistent revenue assessment of identical provisioning in past years and found no substantial question of law warranting admission of the appeal. en-us Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Feb 2025 08:42:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766163 The Bombay HC upheld ITAT's decision allowing insurance company's provisions for uncertain liabilities. The court distinguished between accrued and contingent liabilities, ruling that provisions based on actuarial valuation mandated by IRDA constitute present obligations, not contingent liabilities. Following SC precedents in Rotork Controls, Metal Box Company, and Bharat Earth Movers, the court held that scientifically calculated provisions meeting regulatory requirements cannot be treated as unascertained liabilities. The AO's approach contradicted established law in General Insurance Corporation case. The court noted consistent revenue assessment of identical provisioning in past years and found no substantial question of law warranting admission of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766163