Case LawHigh Court › Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. M/S....

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Sbi Life Insurance Co Ltd

High Court 22 Mar 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Sbi Life Insurance Co Ltd
Date of order
22 Mar 2019
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Sbi Life Insurance Co Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In either case, no question of law arises.Income Tax Appeal is dismissed. [ SARANG V.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 372 OF 2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 ..Appellant Versus M/s. SBI Life Insurance Co Ltd..Respondent ................... •Mr. Suresh Kumar and Ms. Samiksha Kanani for the Appellant •Mr. Sameer Dalal for the Respondent ................... CORAM : AKIL KURESHI & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ. DATE : MARCH 22, 2019. P.C.: 1.This appeal is filed by the Revenue to challenge thejudgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “the Tribunal”for short raising following question for our consideration:- "Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case and inlaw, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty imposed underSection 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of negative reserve,ignored in calculation of liability to arrive at actuarial surplus, basedon the incorrect assumption of the fact in a common order passed forAY 2004-05 and AY 2005-06 in quantum appeal, the Tribunalrestored the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer fordeciding afresh with certain directions, whereas actually the issuewas decided against the Revenue by the above orders of the Tribunalwith directions?" 2.The Tribunal having merely remanded the issue to theAssessing OfÏcer, we do not find any question of law hasarisen. Learned counsel for the respondent pointed out thaton remand also, the Assessing OfÏcer has held in favour ofthe assessee. In either case, no question of law arises.Income Tax Appeal is dismissed. [ SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ]
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan