← All Phrases

“Section 40(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 40Section 40(1)51 judgments

DCIT, CC 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 3282/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: ShriAbdulla PettiwalaFor Respondent: Shri RiteshMisra(CIT DR)a/w Shri
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 244ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40(1)Section 43B

providing various administrative services / fulfilment services on the ground that it was illegal higher insurance commission paid in contravention of the provisions of section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938. 3. The CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.34,80,23,328 under Section 37(1 ... relevant law in the present case is the Insurance Act. The AO has alleged that the assessee has violated the provision of Sections 40(1) and 40(2A) of the Insurance Act and IRDAI guidelines. In this context, the allegation of the Departmental Authorities is the assessee has paid commission

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 2842/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 244ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40(1)Section 43B

providing\nvarious administrative services / fulfilment services on the ground that it was illegal higher\ninsurance commission paid in contravention of the provisions of section 40(1) of the Insurance\nAct, 1938.\n3. The CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.34,80,23,328 under Section 37(1 ... relevant law in the present case is the Insurance Act. The AO has alleged that the\nassessee has violated the provision of Sections 40(1) and 40(2A) of the Insurance Act and IRDAI\nguidelines. In this context, the allegation of the Departmental Authorities is the assessee has\npaid commission

AADARSH LADDHA, LEGAL HEIR OF KAILASH CHAND LADDHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 37(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1013/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1013/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Aadarsh Laddha,………………….………...……Appellant (Legal Heir Of Kailash Chand Laddha) 31, Giri Babu Lane, Kolkata-700012, W.B. [Pan:Abapl2499R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-37(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Sidhharth Kejriwal, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(2)

relevant law in the present case is the Insurance Act. The AO has alleged that the assessee has violated the provision of Sections 40(1) and 40(2A) of the Insurance Act and IRDAI guidelines. In this context, the allegation of the Departmental Authorities is the assessee has paid commission

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

ITA 2845/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3 to\n7 raised by the Assessee pertaining to merits of such\nadditions/disallowances are dismissed as having been rendered\ninfructuous

ITA 2841/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

ITA 2836/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

ITA 2834/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies \non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the \ninstructions of insurance companies.\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person \nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of \nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax \n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was \nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of \nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car \ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement \nof expenses

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

from the insurance companies on the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the instructions of insurance companies. 2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person shall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of this Act, pay or contract ... received from Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was making payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car dealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement of expenses

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

ITA 2827/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies \non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the \ninstructions of insurance companies. \n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person \nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of \nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax \n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was \nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of \nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car \ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement \nof expenses

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

from the insurance companies on the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the instructions of insurance companies. 2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person shall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of this Act, pay or contract ... received from Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was making payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car dealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement of expenses

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, MUMBAI

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3 to\n7 raised by the Assessee pertaining to merits of such\nadditions/disallowances are dismissed as having been rendered\ninfructuous

ITA 2623/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: "CLEAN_TEXT": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n\"I\" BENCH, MUMBAI\n\nSHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

from the insurance companies on the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the instructions of insurance companies. 2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person shall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of this Act, pay or contract ... received from Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was making payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car dealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement of expenses

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

ITA 2621/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies \non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the \ninstructions of insurance companies. \n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person \nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of \nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax \n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was \nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of \nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car \ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement \nof expenses

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

ITA 2620/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

ITA 2619/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

ITA 2618/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from the insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

ITA 2617/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2010-11
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

insurance companies\non the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the\ninstructions of insurance companies.\n\n2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person\nshall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of\nthis Act, pay or contract ... from Director of Income Tax\n(Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was\nmaking payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of\nthe Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car\ndealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement\nof expenses

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

from the insurance companies on the basis of the false invoices issued by them on the instructions of insurance companies. 2. As per Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938, no person shall after the expiry of six months from the commencement of this Act, pay or contract ... received from Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Chennai according which, inter-alia, the Assessee was making payment to car dealers in violation of Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act, 1938. Commission was being paid to the car dealers in the grab of making payments towards reimbursement of expenses

M/S. INDIA EXPOSITION MART LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1079/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2025AY 2009-10
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148

such cases.\nIn the first case, the Assessing Officer in the original\nassessment had made additions of Rs.19,86,551/-\nunder Section 40(1) on account of unconfirmed sundry\ncreditors. The reassessment proceedings were initiated after\nnoticing that unconfirmed sundry creditors, of which details\netc. were not furnished, were

DCIT, CC-6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 3281/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT (DR) Shri
Section 37(1)

Team Space retained 3.5% of the amount received from the assessee and passed on the balance amount to motor vehicle dealers. Referring to Section 40(1),40(2A), 42E of Insurance Act, 1938 and circular issued by Insurance Regularity and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), the AO observed that ... core activity of assessee’s business, the payment to aggregators falls within the non-core activity. Therefore, there is no violation of Section 40(1) of the Insurance Act. He submitted, the entire basis of the addition is the report submitted by the DGCEI. He submitted, the report does

Showing 1–20 of 51 · Page 1 of 3