What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that an identical issue in a previous assessment year was remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication. Following this precedent, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO for reconsideration with similar directions.

The assessee claimed a disallowance of Rs. 2,94,652/- on account of insurance premium paid for staff members. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance. The assessee argued that an identical issue in a previous assessment year was remitted back to the AO by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the insurance premium paid for staff members is allowable as a business expenditure. Whether the issue should be remitted to the AO for fresh verification based on previous Tribunal orders.

M/S. Charotar Gas Sahkari Mandali… vs DCIT | ITAT Ahmedabad 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘D’

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR

Hearing: 07/01/2019

PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of the ld.CIT(A)—4, Vadodara dated 30.11.2016 passed for the assessment year 2012-13.

Sole grievance of the assessee is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.2,94,652/- which was claimed on account of insurance premium paid for the staff members.

ITA No.652/Ahd/2017 - 2 -

The ld.counsel for the assessee at the very outset submitted that identical issue arose in the Asstt.Year 2011-12 the Tribunal has set aside his issue to the file of the AO while deciding the appeal of the assessee bearing no.412/Ahd/2016. She submitted that this issue be remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The ld.DR was not able to controvert the contentions of the ld.counsel for the assessee.

With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record. We find that identical issue was remitted by the Tribunal to the file of AO for adjudication afresh. The finding of the Tribunal reads as under:

“6. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute that the assessee has paid insurance premium on the policies taken in the name of the employees. The claim of the assessee that the insurance policy is taken in the category of employer employee policy of the LIC needs verification. In our considered opinion, this is a fit case for restoration to the files of the A.O. for de novo assessment. We accordingly restore the entire assessment to the files of the A.O. The assessee is directed to furnish the details of the insurance policy. The assessee is further directed to show that the employees remained in employment throughout the year and further explained the procedure adopted by the assessee if in case, the employee leaves the employment and the insurance premium is paid on his policy. The A.O. is directed to verify the details afresh and then decide whether the insurance premium is to be allowed on the grounds of commercial expediency as business expenditure.”

ITA No.652/Ahd/2017

Following the above decision of the Tribunal, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO for reconsideration with similar direction as given in the Asstt.Year 2011-12.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Pronounced in the Open Court on 9th January, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

M/S. CHAROTAR GAS SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,ANAND vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments