{"id":27011,"date":"2022-05-20T07:10:40","date_gmt":"2022-05-20T01:40:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-v-sbi-life-insurance-company-ltd-2022-285-taxman-705-bomhc\/"},"modified":"2022-11-02T19:49:52","modified_gmt":"2022-11-02T14:19:52","slug":"cit-v-sbi-life-insurance-company-ltd-2022-285-taxman-705-bomhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-v-sbi-life-insurance-company-ltd-2022-285-taxman-705-bomhc\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT v. SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd (2022) 444 ITR 639\/ 285 Taxman 705 (Bom)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee carried out life insurance business. During assessment proceedings, it furnished its actuarial report as on 31-3-2003 . Assessing Officer after examination, made addition of surplus disclosed in actuarial valuation report The Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee did not offer incremental negative reserves as a part of surplus arrived at as per actuarial valuation, for purpose of computing income from insurance business which had resulted in income escaping assessment . CIT(A) allowed the appeal . Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(A) . On appeal by the revenue dismissing the appeal the Tribunal held that the \u00a0Assessing Officer completed re-assessment disallowing provision for negative reserve . Since negative reserve was part of actuarial report furnished by assessee during original assessment proceedings and Assessing Officer while completing assessment had considered said report, it could not be said that there was non-disclosure of material facts relevant for assessment .Reopening of assessment is\u00a0 not valid .\u00a0 ( AY. 2003 -04 )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S.147: Reassessment \u2013 After the expiry of four years \u2013 Life Insurance company \u2013 Actuarial report- No failure to disclose material facts \u2013 Reassessment is not justified [ S.44,  57 ,  148, Art , 226  ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27011","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-71F","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27011","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27011"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27011\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30663,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27011\/revisions\/30663"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27011"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27011"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27011"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}