9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is carrying on life insurance business, its income is to be determined u/s 44 of the Act by taking into account total surplus as arrived at by actuarial valuation and further income from share holder account was also to be taxed as part of the life insurance business. So finding no illegality or perversity in the impugned findings returned by Ld.CIT(A), grounds 1 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed. Addition u/s 10(23AAB) - Loss from Pension Fund - HELD THAT:- As we are of the considered view that Ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of loss from Pension Fund being exemption under section 10(23AAB) of the Act. So we find no scope to interfere into the finding by Ld.CIT(A). - SHR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in ignoring the fact that the non obstante clause in section 44 is not extended to section 10(23AAB) of the I.T. Act, 1961? 2. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for adjudication of the issues at hand are: The assessee company is into the business of life insurance, governed by the Insurance Act, 1938 and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (hereinafter IRDA) Act, 1999, filed its return of income declaring loss at Rs. 76,90,22,512/-, which was subjected to scrutiny. As per Income-tax Act, the income of the life insurance company is computed under the provisions of section 44 of the Act, which is non obstante provision ov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licable thereto. 5. Undisputedly, assessee company being into the life insurance business is assessable under the provisions contained under section 44 of the Act as well as under the IRDA Act. It is also not in dispute that the assessee is maintaining its regular books of account in accordance with the provisions contained under IRDA. Grounds 1 2: 6. The Ld.DR for the Revenue challenged the impugned deletion made by the Assessing Officer on account of surplus appearing in Form 1 by relying upon the order passed by Assessing Officer. 7. However, on the other hand, the Ld.AR for the assessee contended that this issue has already been decided by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal by following the decision rendered by Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... surance business, there was no substantial question of law arising for consideration . Reference was made to the decision in LIC of India vs. CIT (1964) 51 ITR 773, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Assessing Officer has no power to modify the account after actuarial valuation is done. The issues in 1st, 2nd 3rd ground of appeal in the instant case are squarely covered by the above judgement. Respectfully following the same, we dismiss 1st, 2nd 3rd ground of appeal filed by the revenue. 9. The same view was reiterated by the co-ordinate bench while deciding Revenue's appeal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2010-11 vide ITA No.4038/Mum/2015, dated 23rd June 2017. There being no difference i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmissions and perused materials on record. At the outset, we must observe that merely because the Revenue has filed SLP against the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Life Insurance Corporation Ltd. cannot be valid reason for the Assessing Officer in not following the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court which is binding on him. Be that as it may, we have noticed that while deciding identical issue raised by the Revenue in assessee s own case for assessment year 2011-12, the Tribunal in the order referred to above, has held as under:- 6.1 Now we turn to 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th ground of appeal as they address a common issue. In the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, business u/s 44 of the Act. We find that the issues in the above grounds of appeal are squarely covered by the above judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. We follow the judgement and dismiss 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th ground of appeal filed by the revenue. 16. The same view was reiterated by the Co-ordinate Bench while deciding the Revenue's appeal for assessment year 2010-11 (supra). There being no difference in fact pointed out by the learned Departmental Representative, respectfully following the consistent view of the co-ordinate bench in assessee s own case, we uphold the decision of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the issue. Grounds raised are dismissed. 13. So following the order passed by co-ordinate ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
