<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (10) TMI 603 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368637</link>
    <description>For insurance businesses, income computation and deductions are governed by the special regime under section 44 and the First Schedule, rather than the general disallowance provisions. Reinsurance premium paid to non-resident re-insurers was held subject to tax deduction at source and disallowance under section 40(a)(i), while reopening based on no fresh material was invalid as a change of opinion. Provision for claims not yet crystallised was not deductible, section 14A was inapplicable to the insurance computation, and profit on sale of investments was taxable for the relevant years. UPS qualified for computer-rate depreciation, EPABX did not, solatium fund contributions were allowable, commission/discount retention did not attract TDS, foreign surveyor payments were not taxable in India, and section 115JB did not apply to an insurance company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 17:05:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 603 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368637</link>
      <description>For insurance businesses, income computation and deductions are governed by the special regime under section 44 and the First Schedule, rather than the general disallowance provisions. Reinsurance premium paid to non-resident re-insurers was held subject to tax deduction at source and disallowance under section 40(a)(i), while reopening based on no fresh material was invalid as a change of opinion. Provision for claims not yet crystallised was not deductible, section 14A was inapplicable to the insurance computation, and profit on sale of investments was taxable for the relevant years. UPS qualified for computer-rate depreciation, EPABX did not, solatium fund contributions were allowable, commission/discount retention did not attract TDS, foreign surveyor payments were not taxable in India, and section 115JB did not apply to an insurance company.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368637</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>