TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 923
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nafter referred to as "the Act"), are directed against the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "A" Bench, Chennai, dated 06.08.2018, passed in I.T.A.No.1666/Chny/2011,I.T.A.No.2310/Chny/2014, I.T.A.No.1668/Chny/2011,I.T.A.No.1669/Chny/2011, I.T.A.No.1629/Chny/2011, I.T.A.No.1626/Chny/2011,I.T.A.No.1628/Chny/2011, I.T.A.No.1630/Chny/2011, I.T.A.No.1670/Chny/2011, I.T.A.No.1356/Chny/2013 I.T.A.No.1367/Chny/2013 and I.T.A.No.2371/Chny/2014 for the assessment years 2005-2006 to 2010- 2011. 2.We have heard Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the petitioner/revenue and Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 3.We propose to dispose of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther the Tribunal was justified and correct in holding that UPS is the part of computer and entitled for depreciation @ 60%? 2.Whether the Tribunal was justified and correct in holding that the provisions of 115JB of the Act which enables the companies to compute book profit may not be applicable to insurance companies? 3.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that provision made towards contribution to Solatium fund is not liable to taxation? 4.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source towards the commission paid for receipt of re-insurance premium? 5.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is not liable to deduct the tax at source towards survey fees pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore, liable to be disallowed while computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. We have perused the finding recorded by the Tribunal in this regard and we find that the contribution of 0.1% of gross premium from motor vehicle insurance is done as per the directions given by the Government of India and this amount has been paid by the assessee as per the decision taken by the General Insurance Council in the meeting held on 04.02.2005. Therefore, we find that the Tribunal was fully right in rejecting the case of the revenue stating that the estimation was done in a routine manner and it is an unascertained liability. The decision of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Pune vs. Bajaj Allianz General ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d be certain is the incurring of the liability. It should also be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though the actual quantification may not be possible. If these requirements are satisfied, the liability is not a contingent one." In this case, the liability of making a contribution to the Solatium fund at 1% of premium received, is a certain liability in view of IRDA letter dated 13th May, 2004. Therefore, it is not a contingent liability during the subject Assessment Year. In fact, this Court in Shrikant Textiles v. CIT [1971] 81 ITR 222 (Bom.) has held that whether a liability is ascertained or contingent for a subject Assessment Year, cannot be decided/determined on the basis of the amounts paid in the subsequent/ne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of law is answered against the revenue. 5.TDS on Survey Fees: 12.Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Senior Standing Counsel would vehemently contend that the fee has been paid for utilizing the expertise of the surveyor and therefore, tax has to be deducted at source. 13.We have heard Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, learned counsel for the assessee on the said issue. 14.As rightly held by the Tribunal, the surveyor who has been engaged to assess the damage to the goods in transit does not have a permanent establishment in India. Furthermore, the surveyor does not share his knowledge for assessing the damage of goods and this aspect is never made known to the assessee. In fact, the assessee succeeded before the CIT(A) on this issue pertaining to the assessment y....