TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 41
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench dated 27.06.2008 made in ITA No.2137/Mds/2006 for the assessment year 2002-03. For appellant: Dr.Anitha Sumanth For respondent: Mr.K.Subramaniam, Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J.) The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not correct? 3. The facts are: The assessee is engaged in the business of design, manufacture, sale, erection and commissioning of equipments and projects. In respect of the assessment year 2002-03 the assessee filed its return of income on 29.10.2002 admitting an income of Rs.36,60,370/-, after claiming relief under section 80HHC of the Act. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... became an integral part of the sale price; in other words, the warranty stood attached to the sale price of the product. Warranty provision had to be recognised because the assessee had a present obligation as a result of past events resulting in an outflow of resources and a reliable estimate could be made of the amount of the obligation. The value of the contingent liability like the warr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e made of the amount of the obligation and held that the provision made for warranty in respect of such sophisticated goods would be entitled to deduction from the gross receipts under section 37 of the Act. 5. Following the said judgment, this Court in the case of CIT III v. M/s. FL Smedth Ltd., Tax Case (Appeal) No.341 of 2004 by order dated 09.06.2009, after extracting paragraph 7....