ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI V. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 7844/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9258 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KISHAN VYAS
• Section: 234B; 14A; 10

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL I BE NCH, MUMBAI , !' $ $ $ $ % & ' , !' ( BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I .T.A. NO. 7844/MUM/2011 ( ) ) ) ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE ACIT 10(1), 455, 4 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI 400020 / VS. M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ICICI BANK TOWERS, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI 400051 '* ./ +, ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAAC 1790G ( *- / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) ./I .T.A. NO. 7619/MUM/2011 ( ) ) ) ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ICICI BANK TOWERS, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI 400051 / VS. THE ACIT 10(1), 455, 4 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI 400020 '* ./ +, ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAAC 1790G ( *- / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY SHRI KISHAN VYAS ASSESSEE BY MS. AARTI VISSANJI 0 %1 / DATE OF HEARING :12.02.2015 23) 0 %1 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:12.02.2015 I .T.A. NO. 7844& 7619/MUM/2011 A.Y. 2007-08 2 !& / O R D E R PER N.K.BILLAIYA, JM: ITA NO.7844/MUM/2011 AND 7619/MUM/2011 ARE CROSS A PPEALS BY THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-21, MUMBAI DATED 25/08/2011 PERTAINING TO A. Y 2007-08. BOTH THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.7844/MUM/2011REVENUES APPEAL: 2. REVENUE HAS RAISED TWO SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS OF AP PEAL. GROUND NO.1, RELATES TO THE DELETION OF THE DISALLOWANCE O F DEDUCTION FOR GAINS ON SALE OF INVESTMENT AND SECOND GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE DELETION OF THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 10(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT). 2.1 AT THE OUTSET LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STA TED THAT THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALREADY DECIDED BY THE TR IBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPLIED THE COPIES OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 2.2. LD. DR COULD NOT BRING ANY DISTINGUISHING FACT OR DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 2.3 WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUT HORITIES BELOW AND THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE. IN SO FAR AS GROUND NO.1 IS CONCERNED, AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE VIDE ITA NOS.4286 & 4373/MUM/20 09 FOR I .T.A. NO. 7844& 7619/MUM/2011 A.Y. 2007-08 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDE RED THE ISSUE AT PARA- 3 OF ITS ORDER AND AT PARA 5.4 THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOW ING THE EARLIER ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE DECIDED THE IS SUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. RESPECTFULLY FOL LOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH WE DECIDE THIS ISSUE IN FAVO UR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE AND CONFIRM THE FINDINGS OF LD . CIT(A). GROUND NO.1 IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 3. THE ISSUES RAISED VIDE GROUND NO.2 HAVE BEEN C ONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ICICI PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. IN ITA NO.6854, 6855, 6856 & 6859/MUM/2010. THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AT PAGE 59 OF ITS ORDER AND AT PAGE 60 TH E TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATI ON OF INDIA VS. CIT (BOM) AND AT PAGE 62 THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED TH E DECISION IN THE CASE OF NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND FINALLY AT PARA 49 OF THIS ORDER THE TRIBUNAL CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLE D TO GET EXEMPTION UNDER R SECTION 10 OF ACT, 1961. A SIMILAR I SSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN WRIT PETIT ION NO.2560 OF 2011 DATED 1/12/2011, WHEREIN HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS QUA SHED AND SET ASIDE THE NOTICE ISSUED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT W HEN THE REVENUE SOUGHT TO REOPEN THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR DISA LLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 10 OF THE ACT. IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED JUDICIAL DECISION WE CONFIRM THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSU E AND DISMISS GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. I .T.A. NO. 7844& 7619/MUM/2011 A.Y. 2007-08 4 ITA NO.7619/M/2011,ASSESSEE APPEAL: 5. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO TH E DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THIS ISSUE HAS ALSO BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBU NAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.4287 & 4374/MUM/2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE T RIBUNAL AT PARA 5 OF PAGE 6 OF ITS ORDER AND AT PAGE 11 FINALLY CONCLUD ED BY HOLDING THAT THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH WE DECIDE THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED THE LEVY OF INT EREST UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234D. THE LEVY OF INTEREST IS MANDATORY THOUGH CONSEQUENTIAL. WE ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE AO TO LEVY INTEREST AS P ER PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON 12 TH DAY OF FEB. 2015. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) !' /JUDICIAL MEMBER !' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 4! DATED : 12. 02.2015 . . ./ VM , SR. PS I .T.A. NO. 7844& 7619/MUM/2011 A.Y. 2007-08 5 !& !& !& !& 0 00 0 .% .% .% .% 5)% 5)% 5)% 5)% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./*- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 6 / CIT 5. 78 .% , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 89 : / GUARD FILE. !& !& !& !& / BY ORDER, /% .% //TRUE COPY// ; ;; ; / < < < < + + + + (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI