Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, LTPU, Chennai

411 ITR 386High Court2019#8090 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(i)Section 44Section 10(15)(iv)(h)Section 10(34)Section 139(5)Section 234A

Issues it is cited on

section 40(1)section 102section 2(9)section 101section 80jjsection 2(c)section 36(1)(ii)section 114section 28(i)prohibited by lawpurposive interpretationexplanation to section 37

Judgments citing Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, LTPU, Chennai

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2830/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2616/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 ITA No.2619/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year:2015-2016 ITA No.2621/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 ITA No.2623/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & C.O.96/Mum/2024 C.O.97/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 87, New India Assurance Building, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 4…

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2823/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2616/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 ITA No.2619/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year:2015-2016 ITA No.2621/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 ITA No.2623/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & C.O.96/Mum/2024 C.O.97/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 87, New India Assurance Building, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 4…

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2622/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2616/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 ITA No.2619/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year:2015-2016 ITA No.2621/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 ITA No.2623/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & C.O.96/Mum/2024 C.O.97/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 87, New India Assurance Building, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 4…

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2616/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2616/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 ITA No.2619/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year:2015-2016 ITA No.2621/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 ITA No.2623/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & C.O.96/Mum/2024 C.O.97/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 87, New India Assurance Building, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 4…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD)-I/C DCIT CIRCLE 8(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1835/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…ing tax at source and held that these payments are in violation of Insurance Act, 1938 and not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. He also referred to the order of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of DCIT v. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd [2019] 411 ITR 386 and concluded that the order cannot be applied to the instant assessment year. Thus, ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of Rs.621,52,40,320/- as no TDS was done. 10.1. On the above, ld. CIT(A) observed that the issue had been decided by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in assessee's own case for A.Y.2015-16 in ITA No.1718/Mu…

DCIT, CIR-8(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,, MUMBAI

ITA 1834/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…ng tax at source and held that these payments are in violation of Insurance Act, 1938 and not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. He also referred to the order of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of DCIT v. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. [2019] 411 ITR 386 and concluded that the order cannot be applied to the instant assessment year. Thus, ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of Rs.621,52,40,320/- as no TDS was done. 10.1. On the above, ld. CIT(A) observed that the issue had been decided by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in assessee's own case for A.Y.2015-16 in ITA No.1718/Mu…

M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1816/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…ng tax at source and held that these payments are in violation of Insurance Act, 1938 and not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. He also referred to the order of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of DCIT v. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. [2019] 411 ITR 386 and concluded that the order cannot be applied to the instant assessment year. Thus, ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of Rs.621,52,40,320/- as no TDS was done. 10.1. On the above, ld. CIT(A) observed that the issue had been decided by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in assessee's own case for A.Y.2015-16 in ITA No.1718/Mu…

M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1815/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…ng tax at source and held that these payments are in violation of Insurance Act, 1938 and not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. He also referred to the order of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of DCIT v. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. [2019] 411 ITR 386 and concluded that the order cannot be applied to the instant assessment year. Thus, ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of Rs.621,52,40,320/- as no TDS was done. 10.1. On the above, ld. CIT(A) observed that the issue had been decided by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in assessee's own case for A.Y.2015-16 in ITA No.1718/Mu…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all assessment years

ITA 1367/CHNY/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1668 To 1670/Chny/2011 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner- V. M/S.Royal Sundaram – Of Income Tax, Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit, 21, Patullos Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcr 7106 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Sr.St. Counsel Assessee By : Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2023

For Appellant: Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan
Section 14ASection 37Section 40

…-resident reinsurers to the file of the Tribunal to decide the issue in line with the decision made by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT ITA Nos.1668-1670/Chny/2011 & :: 5 :: reported in [2019] 411 ITR 386 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court had also remanded the issue of addition of profit on sale of investment to the file of the Tribunal to re-adjudicate the issue after examining the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Therefore, present appeals filed by the Revenue are listed for hearing to decide t…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all assessment years

ITA 1670/CHNY/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1668 To 1670/Chny/2011 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner- V. M/S.Royal Sundaram – Of Income Tax, Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit, 21, Patullos Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcr 7106 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Sr.St. Counsel Assessee By : Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2023

For Appellant: Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan
Section 14ASection 37Section 40

…-resident reinsurers to the file of the Tribunal to decide the issue in line with the decision made by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT ITA Nos.1668-1670/Chny/2011 & :: 5 :: reported in [2019] 411 ITR 386 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court had also remanded the issue of addition of profit on sale of investment to the file of the Tribunal to re-adjudicate the issue after examining the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Therefore, present appeals filed by the Revenue are listed for hearing to decide t…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all assessment years

ITA 1669/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1668 To 1670/Chny/2011 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner- V. M/S.Royal Sundaram – Of Income Tax, Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit, 21, Patullos Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcr 7106 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Sr.St. Counsel Assessee By : Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2023

For Appellant: Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan
Section 14ASection 37Section 40

…-resident reinsurers to the file of the Tribunal to decide the issue in line with the decision made by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT ITA Nos.1668-1670/Chny/2011 & :: 5 :: reported in [2019] 411 ITR 386 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court had also remanded the issue of addition of profit on sale of investment to the file of the Tribunal to re-adjudicate the issue after examining the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Therefore, present appeals filed by the Revenue are listed for hearing to decide t…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all assessment years

ITA 1668/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1668 To 1670/Chny/2011 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner- V. M/S.Royal Sundaram – Of Income Tax, Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit, 21, Patullos Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcr 7106 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Sr.St. Counsel Assessee By : Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2023

For Appellant: Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan
Section 14ASection 37Section 40

…-resident reinsurers to the file of the Tribunal to decide the issue in line with the decision made by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT ITA Nos.1668-1670/Chny/2011 & :: 5 :: reported in [2019] 411 ITR 386 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court had also remanded the issue of addition of profit on sale of investment to the file of the Tribunal to re-adjudicate the issue after examining the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Therefore, present appeals filed by the Revenue are listed for hearing to decide t…

ANHEUSER BUSCH INBEV INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-CIRCLE-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 942/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)

…elf admitted that it has incurred an expenditure which is in violation of the law. 58. In this regard, the Appellant also refers to a judgment of the Madras High Court in Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax 411 ITR 386 (Refer Page No 317-317 of the legal paperbook). In this case the Tribunal had held that the payment of reinsurance premium to a foreign reinsurer was contrary to the provisions of the Insurance Act and, therefore, was to be disallowed having (A.Ys: 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Anheuser Busch InBev India Ltd., regard to Explanation 1 below section 37(1…

ANHEUSER BUSCH INBEV INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT,CIRCLE-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 941/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)

…elf admitted that it has incurred an expenditure which is in violation of the law. 58. In this regard, the Appellant also refers to a judgment of the Madras High Court in Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax 411 ITR 386 (Refer Page No 317-317 of the legal paperbook). In this case the Tribunal had held that the payment of reinsurance premium to a foreign reinsurer was contrary to the provisions of the Insurance Act and, therefore, was to be disallowed having (A.Ys: 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Anheuser Busch InBev India Ltd., regard to Explanation 1 below section 37(1…