https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785545 Provision for warranty under s.37 is defensible where provisions are estimated on the basis of historical experience and past utilisation; the assessment that opening balances alone negate the need for further provisioning was rejected because consistent prior practice and year-wise utilisation demonstrated an obligating event and probable outflow. The scientific, experience-based estimation of warranty liability was therefore treated as an admissible business expenditure and the provision maintained as deductible on that basis, with the taxpayers claim allowed in consequence. en-us Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Jan 2026 15:11:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785545 Provision for warranty under s.37 is defensible where provisions are estimated on the basis of historical experience and past utilisation; the assessment that opening balances alone negate the need for further provisioning was rejected because consistent prior practice and year-wise utilisation demonstrated an obligating event and probable outflow. The scientific, experience-based estimation of warranty liability was therefore treated as an admissible business expenditure and the provision maintained as deductible on that basis, with the taxpayers claim allowed in consequence. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785545