TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee was a plausible view and the said view is not open for review by the CIT by way of invoking the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act - ITA No. 251 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 8-11-2013 - MR.RAJIVE BHALLA MR.DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON JJ. For the appellant: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Ravi Shankar, Advocate RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (Oral) The revenue is before us, challenging order dated 30th April, 2012, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT), whereby, order dated 29th March, 2011 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana (CIT), under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Act') has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mium paid against Keyman Insurance Policies but after recording his satisfaction dropped the proceedings. The CIT exercising power under Section 263 of the Act held that deduction could not be allowed on premium paid to secure the lives of parties. The ITAT has set aside this order. Admittedly, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, has issued a circular allowing an assessee to claim deduction for premium paid to insure the lives of its partners under Keyman Insurance Policies. A circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority asking insurance companies not to issue such policies may be binding upon insurance companies but is not binding upon an authority exercising power under the 1961 Act. It would be appropriate to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. 14. We find that, similar issue is allowability of premium paid on lives of partners under Keyman Insurance Policy arose before the Hon ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. B.N. Exports [323 ITR 178 (Bom)] and Sunita Finlease Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2008) 118 TTJ (Bilaspur) 263 and the said expenditure has been allowed. In view of the above said judicial precedents on the issue, the order of the Assessing Officer in allowing the claim of the assessee was a plausible view and the said view is not open for review by the CIT by way of invoking the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act. The opinion recorded by the ITAT is neither perverse nor arbitrary as it is based upon a circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
