TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1512
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rule 5 of First schedule of the Income tax Act. 3. The first issue relates to the taxability of profits arising on sale of investment. It was brought to our notice that the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the assessee's own case relating to AY 2004- 05 and 2006-07 in ITA No.3562/Mum/2007 and ITA No.3180/Mum/2009 in its order dated 27-02-2015. The Tribunal considered the amendments brought in Rule 5 by Finance Act, 1988 w.e.f. 1.4.1989 and also subsequent amendment brought w.e.f. 1.4.2011 by Finance Act 2009. The Tribunal noticed that the Finance Act 1988 omitted the provision relating to exemption of the profits earned on sale of investments by general insurance companies and the same was brought to tax ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the assessee by following the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in the case of Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd (ITA No.2597/Mum/2009 dated 22.10.2010). Following the said order, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete this addition. 6. The next issue relates to the addition made u/s 69B of the Act. The AO noticed that the actual value of shares held by the Custodian of the Assessee has exceeded the book value by Rs. 5.20 lakhs. Hence the AO assessed the same u/s 69B of the Act and Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same. The explanation of the assessee was that it had sold the shares, but the buyer has failed to take delivery of the same and hence the difference between ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....total income and the same was rejected by the tax authorities. In effect, the claim of the assessee is that the provision reversal made on 1.4.2004 should be excluded while computing the total income. 10. We heard the parties on this issue. The assessee has furnished the copies of income tax computation filed for AY 2003-04 and also the assessment order passed for that year. A perusal of the same shows that the assessee has itself disallowed the provision of Rs. 5.95 crores while computing the total income. Thus, it is seen that the assessee has not claimed the provision made for Ex-gratia payment in AY 2003-04. However, the assessee has not furnished the details of assessment pertaining to AY 2004-05. 11. The contention of the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the computation of Book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. The co-ordinate bench of Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the assessee's own case relating to AY 2004-05 and 2006-07 in ITA No.3562/Mum/2007 and ITA No.3180/Mum/2009 and has held that the provisions of sec. 115JB shall not be applicable to the assessee. Following the same, we also hold so and accordingly set aside the orders passed by the tax authorities on this issue. 14. The next issue urged by the assessee relates to the non-granting of credit for foreign taxes paid by it. The Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court reported in 351 ITR 295 and submitted that the year of payment of foreign tax is irrelevant. He further submitted th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntral Excise (Supplment 2) SCC 432. Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed. 18. The ground no.1 and 2 relate to the profit on sale of investments. Since we have held that the profit on sale of investments is not taxable in the hands of the assessee in its entirety while adjudicating the grounds of the assessee, these two grounds urged by the revenue becomes infructuous. 19. Ground No.5 relates to the addition of Rs. 44.66 lakhs relating to interest charged u/s 234C of the Act. Ld A.R fairly admitted that this issue is decided against the assessee in the earlier years. Accordingly we confirm the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 20. Ground no.6 relates to the claim relating to reversal of Provision for impairment loss on inves....