TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 230
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 250 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee in his Notarized Affidavit stated that he is Non-Resident Indian residing in USA for the last so many years and no income from India except the investment made in Max Life Insurance ULIP plan. Thus he is not aware of the appellate order passed Commissioner (Appeals), only during the recovery proceedings, he came to know about the appellate order which has resulted in filing the present appeal with a delay of 250 days. We are satisfied with the reasons stated by the assessee, thereby we condone the delay of 250 days in filing the above appeal. 3. Brief facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f policy exceeds twenty per cent of the actual capital sum assured, or (d) any sum received under an insurance policy issued on or after the 1st day of April, 2012 in respect of which the premium payable for any of the years during the terms of policy exceeds ten per cent of the actual capital sum assured. It is an admitted fact that the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings, before the Ld. AO has accepted that the appellant has paid the premium exceeding 20% of sum assured and hence the appellant was not eligible for exemption u/s 10(100) of the Act. The appellant's reliance on the said fourth proviso and fifth proviso to sec 10(10D) of the Act is misplaced as the same have inserted by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rds providing the life cover to the person and the residual portion is invested in a fund which in turn invests in stocks or bonds. The investor also has a choice to choose between the equity based funds or the bond based funds and the investor can switch from one form of investment to another. Therefore, the appellant has requested to tax the impugned sum received on surrender of said ULIPs under the head 'Capital gain' and in support of said contention has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Shri Girish Haribhai Trivedi (supra) The said contentions of the appellant have been considered carefully. The sec 2(14), which defines the 'Capital asset' as stood in relevant assessment year ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are not covered under said fourth and fifth proviso to sec 10(10D) of the Act. 7.4.5 Further, from perusal of the in the case of Shri Girish Haribhal Trivedi, it is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had considered therein the investment made in ICICI Pru Life, and had held that the 'The surplus will, therefore, be treated as long term capital gain on investment in mutual funds' and the Hon'ble Tribunal has simply concurred with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), therein and upheld his order. However, with due respect to the appellate authority and the Hon'ble Tribunal, the said decision in the case of Shri Girish Haribhai Trivedi cannot be accepted as therein the Ld. CIT(A) and the Hon'ble Tribunal had erred in holding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....addition of Rs. 22,01,977/- to the income of the applicant (ii) Set-aside the draft assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144C(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee brought to our attention that Tribunal decision in the case of Shri Girish Haribhai Trivedi relied before Ld.CIT(A) was distinguished, wherein the Tribunal holding that ULIP has mutual funds. Whereas ULIP and Mutual Fund are different financial products and also the regulatory authority for both the products are different namely for ULIP it is Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India and for Mutual Funds its Regulatory Authority is SEBI. Thus the case law is not applicable to the facts of the assessee case. However Ld. Counse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... amendment to section 2(14)(c) of the Act vide Act No. 13 of 2021 which has specifically stated the investment in unit linked insurance policy as 'capital asset'. 11. From the above observation, we find merit in the submission of the assessee and we hereby hold that the above mentioned policy will come under the purview of 'capital asset' as per section 2(14) of the Act for which the A.O. is directed to tax the accretion on surrender of the said policy under the head 'income from capital gains' and not as 'income from other sources'. Hence, ground nos. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee are allowed. Ground nos. 4 & 5 are consequential in nature. Ground no. 6 being a general ground requires no adjudication. Since we have decided this issu....