Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs Life Insurance Corporation of India

These appeals challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Revenue projects the following three questions as substantial questions of law.

"A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon''ble ITAT was right in deleting the addition made by Assessing Officer on account of loss from Jeevan Suraksha Fund ignoring the settled position of law that income includes loss and that the loss from Jeevan Suraksha Fund can be set off against taxable income of the assessee corporation despite the fact that Jeevan Suraksha Fund is covered u/s. 10(23AAB) of the I.T. Act, whereby the income including the loss is not includible in the total income?

B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon''ble ITAT was justified in ignoring the fact that the non-obstante clause in section 44 is not extended to section 10(23AAB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

C. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon''ble ITAT was right in holding that amount paid from the profit of Life Insurance business to the Central Government under the statutory obligation is not in the nature of dividend and by holding that provision of section 115-O are not applicable to the assessee Corporation, without appreciating the fact that all domestic companies are liable to pay additional income tax @ 15% on any account declared, distributed or paid by way of dividends on or after 01.06.1997, whether out of current or accumulated profits?"

As far as Questions A and B are concerned, both sides fairly state that in the assessee''s own case viz. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India Limited, (2011) 245 CTR 391 : (2011) 338 ITR 212 : (2011) 201 TAXMAN 155 , Questions A and B and in the manner proposed before us have been answered. They have been answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. This fact having been confirmed by Mr. Suresh Kumar on reading of the judgment in the report Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India Limited, (2011) 245 CTR 391 : (2011) 338 ITR 212 : (2011) 201 TAXMAN 155 , we dismiss these appeals as far as Questions A and B are concerned.

Question C is common to Income Tax Appeal No. 2115 of 2010. That Income Tax Appeal has been admitted and raises an identical question. Hence, these appeals are also admitted on Question C.

The Registrar (Judicial)/Registrar, High Court, Original Side, Bombay to ensure that the original record in relation to this Appeal is summoned from the Tribunal and offered for inspection of the parties. This paper book is treated sufficient for the purpose of admission of this Appeal. However, the Registry must further ensure preparation of complete paper book in accordance with the Rules. The Registry in the first instance must send intimation of admission of this Appeal enclosing therewith a copy of this order so as to enable the Tribunal to act accordingly.

Mr. Jasani waives service on behalf of the assessee.

To be heard along with Income Tax Appeal No. 2115 of 2010 and connected appeals.