IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F ; NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JM AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, A M I.T.A. NO.1965/DEL OF 2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, SHRI RAJAN NANDA NEW DELHI. VS 2, FRIENDS COLONY (W), NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SMT. BANITA DEVI NAREOM RESPONDENT BY: NONE ORDER PER C.L. SETHI, JM THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 3 .2.2010 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF AN ASSESSMENT MADE U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: 1(A) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN LAW AS THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR ANY DEDUCTIONS TOWARDS MATURITY PROCEEDS OF INSURANCE POLICY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(10D) CLAUSE (B) STIPULATES THAT ANY SUM RECEIVED UNDER KEYMAN POLICY IS TAXABLE. 1(B) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN LAW BY INTERPRETING THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND THE CIRCULAR 2 NO.762 DATED 18.2.1998 ISSUED BY CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 1(C) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW RELYING THE EARLIER YEAR DECISIONS BY THE ITAT IN ASSESSEE OWN CASE WHICH ARE NOT ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AND APPEAL ARE PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, 2. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND NOT TENABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR. NONE FOR THE ASSE SSEE WAS PRESENT. 4. IN THIS CASE, AN ADDITION OF RS.23,51,25,000/-, BEING THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM LIC ON MATURITY OF KEYMAN LIFE INSURA NCE POLICY WAS MADE BY THE AO, AGAINST WHICH ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPE AL BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). AFTER DELIBERATING UPON THE FACTS OF THE C ASE AND THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL OF EARLIER YEARS, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.13,25,92,264/-, AND GRANTED RELIEF TO THE EXTENT OF RS.10,25,32,736/-. AGAINST THE LEARNED CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 3.2.2010, THE ASSESSEE ALSO PREFERRED AN APPEAL TAKING A GROUND THAT LEARNED CI T(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.13,25,9 2,264/- OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.23,51,25,000/- MADE BY THE AO. THE A PPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS REGISTERED AS ITA NO.922/DEL/2010, WHI CH CAME UP FOR HEARING BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BEN CH F, NEW DELHI, AND CAME TO BE DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATE D 4.6.2010 WHEREBY THE 3 ISSUE WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR H IS FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THAT ORDER. THE REVENUE IS ALSO IN APPEAL AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER IN GRANTING A RELIEF OF RS.10,25,32,736/- OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.23,51,25,000/- MADE BY THE AO. THUS, THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, AND THAT O F THE ASSESSEE ARE INTER- CONNECTED. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING TRIBUNALS ORDER D ATED 4.6.2010 PASSED IN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SAME IMPUG NED ORDER OF CIT(A), WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR H IS FRESH ADJUDICATION, IN THE LIGHT OF THE OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THE AFORESAID ORD ER DATED 4.6.2010 OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN ASSESSEES APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O N 1 ST JULY, 2010 IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE HEARING WAS OVER. (A.K. GARODIA) (C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 ST JULY, 2010/ VIJAY COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-II, NEW DELHI. 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR