ACIT, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI
In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed
ITA 2372/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010
Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel
7) of the Insurance Act, 1938 is only the insurer
which was defined in Section 2(9) of the Insurance Act, 1938. There cannot be any extended meaning which can be given to the
term “other insurer”. The definition given in Section 2(9) of
Insurance Act, 1938 is not inclusive one. It is an exhaustive one.
Therefore, an Indian
