Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1566 - ITAT MUMBAIAssessment of insurance business - adjustment of earlier years surplus worked out as per actuarial valuation - HELD THAT:- Identical issue arose in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2008–09 [2013 (10) TMI 1072 - ITAT MUMBAI] the Tribunal following its own case in ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd. v/s ACIT I [2012 (11) TMI 13 - ITAT MUMBAI] the profits and gains of life insurance business shall be taken to be the annual average of the surplus arrived at by adjusting the surplus or deficit disclosed by the actuarial valuation made in accordance with the Insurance Act, 1938,in respect of the last inter-valuation period ending before the commencement of the assessment year,so as to exclude from it any surplus or deficit included therein which was made in any earlier inter-valuation period - Decided in favour of assessee. Taxability of income arising in share holder’s account - HELD THAT:- Notably, identical issue arose in assessee’s own case as referred to above and while deciding the issue the Tribunal followed the decision of ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd. [2012 (11) TMI 13 - ITAT MUMBAI] and held that income arising in share holders account cannot be taxed as income from other sources but has to be assessed as income from business or profession considering the fact that the business carried out by the assessee is governed by the provisions of section 44. Since the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the issue following the decision of the Tribunal cited supra, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). This ground is dismissed. Transfer of money from share holders account to the policy holder’s account - transfer of capital asset, hence and not taxable under section 44 - HELD THAT:- Notably, the aforesaid issue arose in assessee’s own case for the preceding assessment years. While deciding the issue the Tribunal following its own order in the case of ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd [2012 (11) TMI 13 - ITAT MUMBAI] what assessee has done in reconciling the IRDA format with that of old Insurance Form is correct and accordingly the loss disclosed in the computation of income is according to the actuarial surplus/deficit under the Insurance Act, 1938 prescribed under Rule 2 of the first schedule part-A. In view of this, we are of the opinion that insistence by AO to bring to tax the entire amount shown under the new Regulations including transfer from Share-holders‟ account is not correct. Instead of AO in taking the surplus at Regulation 8(1)(a) which is the actuarial surplus / deficit for the year took the amount as disclosed at Regulation 8 (1) (f) (total surplus after transfer from Share-holders‟ account) which is not at all correct. Assessment of insurance business - whether surplus available both in policy holder’s account and shareholders account is to be consolidated and the net surplus is to be taxed as income from insurance business? - HELD THAT:- Surplus available both in policy holder’s account and shareholders account is to be consolidated and the net surplus is to be taxed as income from insurance business. It is noted by us that identical issue arose in assessee’s own case in the preceding assessment year [2013 (10) TMI 1072 - ITAT MUMBAI] and while deciding the issue, the Tribunal following its own decision in the case of ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd. [2012 (11) TMI 13 - ITAT MUMBAI] once assessee was in the life insurance business the computation had to be made in accordance with the Rule-2 as per provisions of section 44,that both the Policy-holders‟ and Share holder's account had to be consolidated into one and transfer from one account to another was tax neutral,that the AO had taxed the surplus after the funds had been transferred from Share -holder's account to the Policy-holders‟ account at the gross level while ignoring such transfer in share holder's account,that as per the provisions of section 44 of Act heads of income like income from other sources,capital gains, house property or even interest on securities did not come into play and only first schedule had to be invoked to arrive at the profit,that both accounts-the Policyholders‟ and Share-holders‟ account- had to be consolidated for the purpose of arriving at the deficit or surplus. Addition u/s 14A - special provisions of section 44 applicable - HELD THAT:- Commissioner (Appeals) while deciding the issue held that in view of special provisions of section 44 provisions of section 14A, is not attracted. It is worth mentioning, similar issue arose in assessee’s own case in the preceding assessment years and the Tribunal while deciding the issue followed its own decision in ICICI Prudential Insurance Co. Ltd. [2012 (11) TMI 13 - ITAT MUMBAI] and held that since assessee’s income is to be computed under section 44, no disallowance under section 14A can be made. Respectfully following the decision of Co–ordinate Bench cited supra, we uphold the decision of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue. This ground is dismissed. Interest u/s 234B - HELD THAT:- While deciding the issue of chargeability of interest under section 234B, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that the levy of interest under section 234B is mandatory, hence, directed the Assessing Officer to revise the computation of interest leviable while giving effect to the appeal order. We fail to understand, how the Department can have any grievance against the aforesaid direction of Commissioner (Appeals). In any case of the matter, while deciding identical issue in assessee’s own case for preceding assessment years, the Tribunal considered the fact that assessee used to calculate advanced tax on the basis of its return of income filed for the past years and the income likely to be earned in the impugned assessment year, had a bonafide belief that it was not liable to pay advance tax. Tribunal held that interest is not leviable u/s 234B . Facts in the impugned assessment year are more or less identical. That being the case no interest under section 234B is leviable. Negative reserve assessment - whether no surplus or taxable income at the hands of the assessee - HELD THAT:- As could be seen in assessee’s own case for preceding assessment years treatment given to negative reserves by actuary cannot be disturbed by the AO. Here,it would be useful to understand meaning of negative reserve in simple terms. While making actuarial valuation,requirement of reserve to service insurance policies issued is ascertained. Such reserve (called mathematical reserve or value of liability)is equal to present value of future benefits payable and future expenses to be incurred less present value of future premium receivable. When the present value of future premium is more than the present value of future benefits payable and future expenses to be incurred, this amount becomes negative, known as “negative reserve". Assessing Officer has no power to modify the amount after actuarial valuation was done, which was the basis for assessment under Rule 2 of 1st Schedule r. w. s. 44 of the I. T. Act.
|