Keyman Insurance Premium Deduction Upheld by Tribunal

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that the premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policies was deductible. The policies were considered as life insurance and purchased before the IRDA circular. The Tribunal emphasized that the policies met the Keyman Insurance criteria and rejected the argument that they were investment schemes. The assignment of policies to partners did not impact premium deduction eligibility, as no maturity value was received. The premium deduction of Rs. 10,00,481 for Keyman insurance policies was allowed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to disallowance of premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policies under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2006-07.

Analysis:
1. The assessee, a partnership firm, challenged the disallowance of Rs. 10,00,481 premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policies. The Assessing Officer noted that the policies did not meet the conditions set by LIC and IRDA circulars. He observed that the policies were not term policies but unit-linked investment schemes, thus not qualifying as Keyman Insurance. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance, emphasizing that the policies were investment schemes, not life insurance, and the benefits did not accrue to the firm. The partners were assigned the policies, and no maturity value was received by the firm.

2. The assessee argued that the IRDA circular prohibiting partnership insurance under Keyman insurance was issued after the policies were purchased. Citing a High Court decision, the assessee contended that even if policies were on partners' lives, the premium should be deductible. The Departmental Representative relied on IRDA guidelines and argued that maturity amounts go to the policyholder, not the firm, hence premium deduction is not allowed. The Tribunal noted that the policies were life insurance policies, purchased before the IRDA circular, and the High Court decision supported premium deduction for partner policies under Keyman Insurance.

3. The Tribunal held that the IRDA circular did not apply retroactively to the assessee's policies. Citing the High Court decision, it allowed the premium deduction as the policies were under Keyman Insurance. It rejected the argument that the policies were investment schemes, as they were life insurance policies. Since the policies were surrendered within three years with no maturity value, the assignment to partners did not affect premium deduction eligibility. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, allowing the premium deduction of Rs. 10,00,481 for Keyman insurance policies.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that the premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policies was deductible, as the policies were life insurance and purchased before the IRDA circular. The Tribunal emphasized that the policies met the Keyman Insurance criteria, rejecting the argument that they were investment schemes. The assignment of policies to partners did not impact premium deduction eligibility, as no maturity value was received.

---