LIC shares fall 2% after insurer gets Rs 7,100-crore income tax demand order

The shares of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) dropped 2% on Friday after the company announced that it has received an income tax demand order worth Rs 7,100 crore, including interest, for the financial year 2021-22.

The insurance behemoth on Wednesday announced in an exchange filing that the income tax demand for FY22 stands at nearly Rs 6,147 crore, along with an interest of Rs 953 crore. The income tax violations listed out by the Assessment unit of the Income Tax Department include addition of interim bonus as income, addition of loss from Jeevan Surakhsha Fund as income, addition of negative reserve as income, as well as disallowance of deduction u/s 80M and disallowance of interest on late deposit of TDS.

LIC said that the order is appealable before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). “The financial impact of the demand is to the extent of the Income Tax and Interest. There is no material impact on operations or other activities of the Corporation,” the state-run insurer added.


Sensex, Nifty today: Catch all the LIVE stock market action here

LIC share price

The announcement was made in the post-market hours of Wednesday. The shares of the life insurer have fallen by more than 8% over the past month and by around 3% over the past year.

In the longer perspective, the stock has gained more than 43% in the past three years. The company has a market capitalisation of more than Rs 4.93 lakh crore.

LIC Q3 snapshot

The state-run company’s net profit jumped 17% year-on-year to Rs 12,930 crore in the October-December quarter of the ongoing financial year 2026. Its net premium income also grew 17% YoY to Rs 1.26 lakh crore during the quarter under review. Its Assets Under Management (AUM) increased to Rs 59,16,680 crore as on December 31, 2025 as compared to Rs 54,77,651 crore on December 31, 2024 registering an increase of 8.01% year on year.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)