9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-XI, Ahmedabad dated 13.09.2010 for A.Y. 2007-08. 2. The facts as culled out from the order of lower authorities are as under: 3. Assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing lamination and trading of aluminum foils and trading of aluminum. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 07-08 on 26.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs. 16,12, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ium as deduction was not found acceptable to the Assessing Officer. He accordingly worked out the premium by considering lower of the gross profit method/net profit method and 10 times remuneration and according to him the allowable premium worked out to Rs. 34.80 lakhs as against 4,50,00,000/- claimed by the Assessee. He accordingly disallowed the excess premium of Rs. 4,15,20,000/- and added to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the case, I am of the view that the A. O. is not justified to make the disallowance of Keyman Insurance Premium payment on the ground that the appellant has made excessive payment of premium as per the guidelines of the Insurance Company. The A. O. has not appreciated the fact that the same Insurance Company itself has permitted the appellant to take the Keyman Insurance Premium policy with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion made by the A.O. is not in accordance with the law. Therefore, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant's claim with regard to Keyman Insurance Premium payment. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed." 3.2.4 In the light of the decision of my predecessor, the contentions of the A.R., the circular and case-laws relied on by him. I am of the view that the disallowance made by the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Exports (2010) 323 ITR 178 has held that premium on the Keyman Insurance Policy of partner of the firm is wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and is allowable as business expenditure. In view of the aforesaid facts, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus this ground of Revenue is dismissed. 8. In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
