Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT

115 ITR 45High Court1978#3856 most cited

What is Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT authority for?

The assessment of profits for insurance companies is governed by specific rules within schedules, and the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot make adjustments if Section 44 has been invoked. Insurance businesses may be entitled to exemptions under Section 10(15) even when Section 44 applies, as Section 44 does not exclude such claims.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Life Insurance Corporation v CIT · 115 ITR 45 · insurance company assessment · Section 44 · Section 10(15) · exemption for insurance business · AO power to adjust profits · schedules for insurance profit calculation

Sections most often in play

Section 44Section 14ASection 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 10Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

section 10(15)section 191section 2(11)section 199section 10(34)interest on securitiessanction under section 151long-term capital assetsection 60transfer of capital assetsection 10(38)beyond four years

Judgments citing Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT

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

…ut even the computation provisions under other heads of income do not apply. 4.2 The Learned PCIT has erred in ignoring the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of LIC vs CIT [51 ITR 773] and Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of LIC V. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 45 (Bom) wherein it is held that assessment of the profits of an insurance companies is completely governed by the rules under the schedules and that the AO has no power to make adjustment once the provisions of section 44 are invoked. 4.3 The Learned PCIT has erred in not citing any specific section of the Act under which the proposed disallowance…

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

…ut even the computation provisions under other heads of income do not apply. 4.2 The Learned PCIT has erred in ignoring the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of LIC vs CIT [51 ITR 773] and Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of LIC V. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 45 (Bom) wherein it is held that assessment of the profits of an insurance companies is completely governed by the rules under the schedules and that the AO has no power to make adjustment once the provisions of section 44 are invoked. 4.3 The Learned PCIT has erred in not citing any specific section of the Act under which the proposed disallowance…

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT nce Corporation of India v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business i…

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1681/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT nce Corporation of India v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business i…

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1680/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT nce Corporation of India v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business i…

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1679/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT nce Corporation of India v. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance (Bom), wherein it was held that an assessee engaged in insurance business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business is entitled to exemption under section 10(15), as the business i…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 4247/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that section 44 of the Act overrides sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

DY. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 4208/MUM/2023[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that section 44 of the Act overrides sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DCIT vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 4185/MUM/2023[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that Section 44 of the Act overrides Sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of Section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

DCIT-1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 1428/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that Section 44 of the Act overrides Sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of Section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

DCIT-1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 1427/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that Section 44 of the Act overrides sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of Section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

DCIT-1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal for the

ITA 1392/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 250Section 44

…enied the\nexemption claimed by the assessee under section 10(23AAB) of the Act.\n20. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, following the decision of the\nHon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. CIT,\nreported in (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bom), and the decision of the Co-ordinate\nBench of the Tribunal rendered in assessee's own case for the preceding years\nheld that section 44 of the Act overrides sections 28 to 43B and not the\nprovisions of section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) directed\nthe AO to delete the addition made by the AO on account of the exemption\…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. HDFC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2716/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit – 1(1)(1) 597, Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai Maharashtra–400020……………. Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 144Section 250Section 28Section 44

…ome. Further, as regards the exemption claimed u/s 10(15)(iv)(h) of the Act in respect of the interest income, the learnedCIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. CIT, [1978] 115 ITR 45 (Bom) and held that the assessee is entitled to claim the exemption. Being aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us. 17. Having considered the submissions of both sides and material and perused the material available on record. We find that the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assesee’s own case in the assessment years2017-18 & 2018-19 c…

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ECGC LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3812/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234Section 234B

…s on the busi- ness of general insurance would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption under clauses (15), (23G) and (33) of section 10 is directly governed by the decision rendered by the Division Bench in Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 45 (Bom) following the earlier decision in CIT v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. [1969] 71 ITR 761 (Bom). The Assessing Officer could not have ignored the binding precedent contained in the two Division Bench decisions of this court. Moreover, the Assessing Officer in allowing the benefit of the exemption, in the order of assessment under section 143(3…

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

ITA 1952/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

…ulfillment of the conditions attached to the relevant provisions and it was submitted that assessee fulfilled both the conditions. Ld counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bombay) to contend that the Hon’ble High Court has held that there is no bar by virtue of section 44 of the Insurance Act and the insurance business corporation are entitled to claim deduction it was otherwise admissible in the case when the assessee computation of income is governed by the other provisions of the Act. It was submitted that Bomba…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 1750/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

…ulfillment of the conditions attached to the relevant provisions and it was submitted that assessee fulfilled both the conditions. Ld counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bombay) to contend that the Hon’ble High Court has held that there is no bar by virtue of section 44 of the Insurance Act and the insurance business corporation are entitled to claim deduction it was otherwise admissible in the case when the assessee computation of income is governed by the other provisions of the Act. It was submitted that Bomba…

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI-400021 vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is disposed off as being partly allowed

ITA 1074/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Anish Thacker &
Section 143(3)Section 199Section 44

…e actuarial valuation as per the provisions of the Insurance Act, 1938. Whereas the contention of the Assessee is that this issue stands decided in favour of the Assessee by the judgment of the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in the case of the Assessee reported in 115 ITR 45 and the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of the Assessee for the Assessment Years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2014-15, 2016- 17 and 2017-18. 47. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We note that the assessing officer in paragraph 5.5 the Assessment Order has noted that this issue has been decided by the…

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSSURANCE CO.LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 200/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Dcit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, Ltu, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 115Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 44

…ulfillment of the conditions attached to the relevant provisions and it was submitted that assessee fulfilled both the conditions. Ld counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. CIT (1978) 115 ITR 45 (Bombay) to contend that the Hon‟ble High Court has held that there is no bar by virtue of section 44 of the Insurance Act and the insurance business corporation are entitled to claim deduction it was otherwise admissible in the case when the assessee computation of income is governed by the other provisions of the Act. It was submitted that Bomba…

DCIT 12 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIA FIRST LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6364/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – 12(2)(2) V. M/S. India First Life Insurance Room No. 128F, 1St Floor Company Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road B-301, Tril It 4, Film City Road Mumbai - 400020 Malad(E), Mumbai - 400097 Pan: Aadcb6215G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Faruk IraniFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 44

…er from the order of the CIT(A) where he has allowed assessee's claim of exemption under section 120 (23AA8) of surplus of participation Pension Business and also dividend under section 10(34). Accordingly, revenue ground on this issue is rejected." (ii) LIC (115 ITR 45) "The only effect of section 44 is that the operation of the provisions referred to therein is excluded in the case of an assessee who carries on insurance business and in whose case the provisions of rule 2 of the First Schedule are attracted. If the deductions which are claimed by the assessee do not fall within the provisions in the case of an…

DCIT 12 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S INDIA FIRST LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6725/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M.Balaganeshआअसं. 6725/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2016-17) Dcit-12(2)(2), Room No. 128F, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai-400020 बनाम Vs. M/S India First Life Insurance Co. Ltd. B-301, Tril It 4, Filmcity Road, Malad (East), Mumbai-400097. Pan: Aadcb6215G ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Sh. R.K. Sahu ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Farookh V. Irani सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 09/08/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2021 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.08.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. 2 Ita No. 6725 Mum 2019 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Sh. R.K. SahuFor Respondent: Shri Farookh V. Irani
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 44

…er from the order of the CIT(A) where he has allowed assessee's claim of exemption under section 120 (23AA8) of surplus of participation Pension Business and also dividend under section 10(34). Accordingly, revenue ground on this issue is rejected." (ii) LIC (115 ITR 45) "The only effect of section 44 is that the operation of the provisions referred to therein is excluded in the case of an assessee who carries on insurance business and in whose case the provisions of rule 2 of the First Schedule are attracted. If the deductions which are claimed by the assessee do not fall within the provisions in the case of an…

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT (115 ITR 45) — Cited in 30 Judgments | BharatTax