https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753546 Provision for unsettled insurance claims was treated as an ascertained liability, because it was based on claims actually lodged by policyholders and not on an ad hoc estimate; later adjudication or rejection of some claims did not change the liability already incurred. Provision for IBNR claims reserve was likewise treated as an ascertained liability, since the reserve was mandated by the insurance regulatory framework and computed through actuarial methods using historical data and reliable estimation. On that basis, both reserves were regarded as deductible under Section 37, and the disallowance was deleted. en-us Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jun 2024 20:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753546 Provision for unsettled insurance claims was treated as an ascertained liability, because it was based on claims actually lodged by policyholders and not on an ad hoc estimate; later adjudication or rejection of some claims did not change the liability already incurred. Provision for IBNR claims reserve was likewise treated as an ascertained liability, since the reserve was mandated by the insurance regulatory framework and computed through actuarial methods using historical data and reliable estimation. On that basis, both reserves were regarded as deductible under Section 37, and the disallowance was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753546