TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the claim of deduction of premium on Keyman insurance policy amounting to Rs. 84,68,494/- was erroneously granted and the order of the Tribunal was unsustainable - ITA No. 37 of 2016 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 5-5-2016 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. SHEKHER DHAWAN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against the order dated 3.9.2015 (Annexure A-IV) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Benches, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in ITA No. 295/Chd/2012, for the assessment year 2005-06, claiming the following substantial question of law: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana passed order dated 30.3.2010 under Section 263 of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to decide the case in view of the directions given thereunder, who vide order dated 12.10.2010 (Annexure A-II) passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act framed the assessment by making addition of Rs. 84,68,494/- on account of disallowance of premium paid on keyman insurance taken on life of partners as the expenditure related to the period beyond 31.3.2005, i.e. beyond the purview of assessment year 2005-06. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal against the order, Annexure A-II, before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for brevity the CIT(A) ]. The CIT(A) vide order dated 15.12.2011 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2004-05 had claimed that an amount of Rs. 90 lacs was paid during that year, out of which Rs. 5,31,506/- related to the assessment year 2004- 05 whereas the balance of Rs. 84,68,494/- was pertaining to assessment year 2005-06. Otherwise also, the case of the assessee was that it had paid Rs. 90 lacs on the Keyman insurance policies during the assessment year 2005-06 as well. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the reply dated 12.10.2010 submitted by the assessee to the notice issued by the Assessing Officer and has been reproduced in the assessment order which reads thus:- (b) That originally in the assessment year 2004-05, the assessee had claimed total premium paid of Rs. 90 lacs as deduction whereas the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
