M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT

38 DTR 282Reported decision2010#4514 most cited

What is M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act is not applicable to insurance businesses governed by specific provisions of Section 44 and Schedule 1. Profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, especially after the deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of the First Schedule.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT · 38 DTR 282 · section 14A · section 44 · insurance business · disallowance u/s 14A · profit on sale of investments · First Schedule Rule 5

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23AAB)Section 10(34)Section 115BSection 14ASection 44

Issues it is cited on

section 14(a)section 14a(1)section 42section 44disallowance u/s 14asection 115bsection 14aappeal before the tribunalprevious yearsection 143companytransfer

Judgments citing M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1366/CHNY/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…case of Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. (supra) and held that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the hands of insurance companies. The ITAT., Pune Bench in the case of M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010) 38 DTR 282 had considered identical issue and held that income from profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, after deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of First Schedule. Therefore, from the above, it is very clear that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the case of insurance companies. The learned CIT(A), after conside…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 1350/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…case of Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. (supra) and held that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the hands of insurance companies. The ITAT., Pune Bench in the case of M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010) 38 DTR 282 had considered identical issue and held that income from profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, after deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of First Schedule. Therefore, from the above, it is very clear that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the case of insurance companies. The learned CIT(A), after conside…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1759/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…case of Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. (supra) and held that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the hands of insurance companies. The ITAT., Pune Bench in the case of M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010) 38 DTR 282 had considered identical issue and held that income from profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, after deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of First Schedule. Therefore, from the above, it is very clear that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the case of insurance companies. The learned CIT(A), after conside…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1676/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…case of Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. (supra) and held that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the hands of insurance companies. The ITAT., Pune Bench in the case of M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010) 38 DTR 282 had considered identical issue and held that income from profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, after deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of First Schedule. Therefore, from the above, it is very clear that profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the case of insurance companies. The learned CIT(A), after conside…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurnce Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3210/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vikas Awasthyआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 3210/Mum/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2013-14) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Kotak Mahindra Old Tax, Central Circle-14(2)(1), Mutual Life Insurance Ltd. 4Th Mumbai Floor, Vinay Bhavya बनाम/ Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Complex, 159A, Cst Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marine Lines, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 098 (अपीलाथ" / Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaaco3983B

For Appellant: Shri Neehar Pandey, DRFor Respondent: Shri Farokh V. Irani, AR
Section 14ASection 44

…neral Insurance Business. The relevant extract of the findings of Tribunal are reproduced herein below:- “ 12. Aggrieved the Assessee is on appeal before us. In the case of Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax 38 DTR 282 Pune, it has been held that Section 14A is not applicable in the case of Insurance business, which is governed by specific provisions of 44 and Schedule 1. In the case of Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Bench, similar view has been taken. Similarly in the case of Birla Sunlife Insurance Co Ltd v. Addi…

DCIT 1(2), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 270/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas, D.R
Section 44

…The diallowance made by Assessing Officer is consequently confirmed and the ground of appeal is rejected." 12. Aggrieved the assessee is on appeal before us. In the case of Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax 38 DTR 282 Pune, it has been held that Sec.14A is not applicable in the case of Insurance business, which is governed by specific provisions of 44 and Schedule 1. In the case of Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Bench, similar view has been taken. Similarly in the case of Birla Sunlife Insurance Co Ltd vs Addition…