DCIT v. Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra)

236 ITR 156High Court1999#17316 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 263 Section 44 Section 80JJAA Section 13(1)

Judgments citing DCIT v. Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra)

Sbi Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 3364/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263

…relied upon the following decision:  DCIT vs Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. ITA No. 656 & 657/Pun/2021  Life Insurance Corpn. Of India vs CIT (1964) 51 ITR 773 (SC)  DCIT vs Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra)  CIT vs Howrah Four Mills Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 156 (Calcutta)  CIT vs Jagadhri Electric Supply & Industrial Co. (1981) 7 Taxman 56 (Punjab & Haryana)  CIT vs Chandrika Educational Trust (1994) 207 ITR 108 (Kerala)  CIT vs Max India Ltd. (2008) 166 Taxman 188 (SC)  CIT vs Paville Projects (P) Ltd. (2023) 149 taxmann.com 115 (SC) 9. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that…

Sbi Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Tax -1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 3363/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263

M/S Mega Management Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 6818/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Navnit ChoudharyFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sethi (Sr. AR)

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)

…ts of a business, profession or vocation and in respect of irrecoverable. loans in the case of banking or money-lending business. A bad debt presupposes the existence of a debt [as reported in CIT v. JK Chemicals 207 ITR 985: CIT Howrah flour Mills Ltd (1999] 236 ITR 156 and in cases in which there never was any debt owing to the assessee, no question can arise of invoking this clause in reported National Petroleum v. CIT 13 ITR 336" 13. Four conditions which govern the grant of an allowance under this clause have been enlightened in the decision reported in Surangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd v. C1T 119831 1.13 ITR 16…

Sahayamatha Salterns Pvt. Limited, Tuticorin vs. DCIT Circle 1, Tuticorin

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1498/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1498/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-2015. M/S. Sahayamatha Salterns Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, 13-A-1, Meenakshipuram Circle I, West, Tuticorin. Tuticorin 628 002. Tamil Nadu

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…jit Gupta vs. ITO, (2007) 108 TTJ 301 05 CIT vs. Narayana P. Dedhia, 270 ITR 572 (AP) 06 DCIT vs. Sunita Finlease Ltd, 330 ITR 491 (Chat) 07 Kwalpro Exports vs. ACIT, 109 TTJ 0869 08 CIT vs. Amal Generators Ltd, 84 DTR 0045 09 CIT vs. Howrah Flour Mills Ltd, 236 ITR 156 10 CIT vs. PVP Ventures, 211 Taxman 554 11 Jai Commercial Co. Ltd. vs. JCIT, 66 TTJ 731 12 Andhra Valley Power Supply vs. DICT, 53 TTJ 0647’’. and decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Smt. Padmavathi vs. ITO in ITA No.1306/CHNY/2019, dated 02.12.2019 for assessment year 2014-2015. 8. Per contra, ld. Sr. Departmental Rep…

Smt. Padmavathi, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward 3, Tirunelveli

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 1306/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)

…CIT, 93 ITR 144. 04 Ajit Gupta vs. ITO, 108 TTJ 301. 05 CIT vs. Narayana P. Dedhia, 270 ITR 572 06 DCIT vs. Sunita Finlease Ltd, 330 ITR 491 07 Kwalpro Exports vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 59 08 CIT vs. Amal Generators Ltd 84 DTR 0045. 09 CIT vs. Howrah Flour Mills Ltd, 236 ITR 156. 10 CIT vs. PVP Ventures 211 Taxman 554 11 Jai Commercial Co. Ltd vs. JCIT, 76 ITR 65 and 12 Andhra Valley Power Supply Co. Ltd vs. DCIT, 55 ITD 24’’. Thus, the ld. Authorised Representative submitted that ld. PCIT ought not have exercised the power of revision in the instant case. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative sub…