General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT

DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Union Dai-Ichi Life Insurance Co.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit-14(3)(2), Mumbai M/S Star Union Dai- 455, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Ichi Life Insurance Co. Vs. Floor, M.K. Marg, Mumbai- Ltd. C-5, G Block, Star 400020. House, 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. Pan No. Aalcs3949Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ajit K. Srivastav, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Shailesh S. Shah Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/07/2018

…d tampered with the net valuation surplus as determined by the Appointed Actuary, that action of the AO was contrary to the provisions of section 44 of the Act r.w. First Schedule to the Act. He relied upon the cases of CIT vs. LIC (51ITR773) and GIC vs. CIT (240 ITR 139). He also relied upon the order of the ICICI Prudential Insurance Co.(supra) delivered by the Mumbai Tribunal. He referred to Circular No.202dtd.05.07.1976 issued by the CBDT explaining and scope of effect of the changes made by the Finance Act, 1976 in the First Schedule to the Act. Alternatively, he submitted that treatment to negative reserve…

The New India Assurance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

…his meaning is to be given to the word 'expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a) the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (SC) the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a)., Theref…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. The New India Assurance Co.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

…his meaning is to be given to the word 'expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a) the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (SC) the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a)., Theref…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Star Unin Dai-Ichi Life Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit -10(1) M/S. Star Union Dia Ichi Life 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Insurance Company Ltd. बनाम/ 4Th Floor, M.K. Marg, C-5,G Block, Star House, 3Rd Vs. Mumbai 400020 Floor, B.K.C. Bandra(E), Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aalcs3949Q Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist (Dr) Respondent By Shri Shailesh Shah (Ar) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 11/01/2017

…d tampered with the net valuation surplus as determined by the Appointed Actuary, that action of the AO was contrary to the provisions of section 44 of the Act r.w. First Schedule to the Act. He relied upon the cases of CIT vs. LIC (51ITR773) and GIC vs. CIT (240 ITR 139). He also relied upon the order of the ICICI Prudential Insurance Co.(supra) delivered by the Mumbai Tribunal. He referred to Circular No.202dtd.05.07.1976 issued by the CBDT explaining and scope of effect of the changes made by the Finance Act, 1976 in the First Schedule to the Act. Alternatively, he submitted that treatment to negative reserve…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Star Union Dia-Ichi Life Insurance Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit -10(1) M/S. Star Union Dia Ichi Life 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Insurance Company Ltd. बनाम/ 4Th Floor, M.K. Marg, C-5,G Block, Star House, 3Rd Vs. Mumbai 400020 Floor, B.K.C. Bandra(E), Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aalcs3949Q Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist (Dr) Respondent By Shri Shailesh Shah (Ar) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 11/01/2017

…d tampered with the net valuation surplus as determined by the Appointed Actuary, that action of the AO was contrary to the provisions of section 44 of the Act r.w. First Schedule to the Act. He relied upon the cases of CIT vs. LIC (51ITR773) and GIC vs. CIT (240 ITR 139). He also relied upon the order of the ICICI Prudential Insurance Co.(supra) delivered by the Mumbai Tribunal. He referred to Circular No.202dtd.05.07.1976 issued by the CBDT explaining and scope of effect of the changes made by the Finance Act, 1976 in the First Schedule to the Act. Alternatively, he submitted that treatment to negative reserve…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Aegeon Religare Life Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon‟Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon‟Ble Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

…the assessee has not computed the profits and gains of its insurance business in accordance with the said rules. Reliance was placed on the scope of s. 144, as held in the case of General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT [1999] 156 CTR (SC) 425 : [1999] 240 ITR 139 (SC), wherein their Lordships of the apex Court have categorically held that the provisions of s. 44 being a special provision govern computation of taxable income earned from business of insurance. I t mandates the tax authorities to compute the taxable income in respect of insurance business in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedu…

Aegon Religare Life Insurance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon‟Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon‟Ble Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

…the assessee has not computed the profits and gains of its insurance business in accordance with the said rules. Reliance was placed on the scope of s. 144, as held in the case of General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT [1999] 156 CTR (SC) 425 : [1999] 240 ITR 139 (SC), wherein their Lordships of the apex Court have categorically held that the provisions of s. 44 being a special provision govern computation of taxable income earned from business of insurance. I t mandates the tax authorities to compute the taxable income in respect of insurance business in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedu…

Icici Lombard General Insurance Comapny Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, by following the orders of this Tribunal, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, the ground is allowed”

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Joginder Singh: (A.Y : 2008-09) Dcit-10(1), Vs. M/S. Icici Lombard General Mumbai (Appellant) Insurance Co. Ltd., 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025. Pan : Aaaci7904G (Respondent) : (A.Y : 2008-09)

…t the assessee has not computed the profits and gains of its insurance business in accordance with the said rules. Reliance was placed on the scope of s. 144, as held in the case of General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT [1999] 156 CTR (SC) 425: [1999] 240 ITR 139 (SC), wherein their Lordships of the Apex Court have categorically held that the provisions of s. 44 being a special provision govern computation of taxable income earned from business of insurance. It mandates the tax authorities to compute the taxable income in respect of insurance business in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedul…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, by following the orders of this Tribunal, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, the ground is allowed”

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Joginder Singh: (A.Y : 2008-09) Dcit-10(1), Vs. M/S. Icici Lombard General Mumbai (Appellant) Insurance Co. Ltd., 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025. Pan : Aaaci7904G (Respondent) : (A.Y : 2008-09)

…t the assessee has not computed the profits and gains of its insurance business in accordance with the said rules. Reliance was placed on the scope of s. 144, as held in the case of General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT [1999] 156 CTR (SC) 425: [1999] 240 ITR 139 (SC), wherein their Lordships of the Apex Court have categorically held that the provisions of s. 44 being a special provision govern computation of taxable income earned from business of insurance. It mandates the tax authorities to compute the taxable income in respect of insurance business in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedul…

Asst CIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. General Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.4926/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम/ Acit 1(3), General Insurance Aayakar Bhavan, Corporation Of India, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 “Suraksha”, 170, J. Tata Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 0615N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri H.S. Singh ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Farrokh V. Irani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :10.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :02.03.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N. Prasad, Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Mumbai Dated 21.03.2014 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds In Its Appeal:

…t but the respected Parliament in his wisdom has decided not to tax the same. In support it was cited that the Insurance Company are governed by Rule 5 of a Schedule. Reliance was placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of General Company of India 240 ITR 139 and Pandyne Insurance Company 55 ITR 716. (c) The allegation of the AO was that any part of the profits and gains not attributable to the Insurance Business cold qualify for exemption and liable to be taxed. The contention of the assessee was that firstly the financial statements of an Insurance Company has to be finalized in accordance with the…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas the CO of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

…011 CO No. 210/Mum/2013 determination of income is binding on the AO and there is no power to tinker with such an account. This proposition has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of General Insurance Corp. of India vs CIT, reported in [1990] 240 ITR 139. Thus, when the income of the assessee as well as the expenditure are governed by specific provision which have an overriding effect, then it is not open for the AO to invoke the other provisions of the Act for carrying out the disallowance or adjustment in the income. Thus, we hold that, no disallowance u/s 14A can be made in the case of the ass…

Tata Aig General Insurance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

…584&3596/11&4071/12 given to the word "expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a), the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (se), the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a). Theref…

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

…584&3596/11&4071/12 given to the word "expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a), the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (se), the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a). Theref…

Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

…584&3596/11&4071/12 given to the word "expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a), the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (se), the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a). Theref…

Tata Aig General Insurance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

…584&3596/11&4071/12 given to the word "expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a), the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (se), the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a). Theref…

Tata Aig General Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T. Range 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

…584&3596/11&4071/12 given to the word "expenditure" occurring in rule 5(a), the amortization claim cannot be considered as expenditure and, therefore, cannot be added back to the balance of the profits. In General Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 139 (se), the Supreme Court held that even if an item of debit is considered as an expenditure, it should further be such an expenditure contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and, therefore, unless there was a specific prohibition for such an allowance, the departmental authorities would not be justified in adding back the amount under rule 5(a). Theref…