Income Tax

Loss by shop burglary arisen during the course of business allowable u/s 37(1) – ITAT

Loss by shop burglary arisen during the course of business allowed u/s 37(1) even when Insurance company assessed loss at lower amount – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2859 (2019) (04) ITAT

This appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (A) on the issue of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the excess claim on account of shop burglary.

The assessee was an individual and Proprietor. During the course of assessment proceedings on perusing the Profit and Loss account, AO noticed that assessee had claimed deduction on account of goods lost in burglary which had taken place in assesses’s shop.

The AO noticed that against the claim of the assessee, the Insurance Company had assessed the loss at a lower amount. However, the assessee had claimed deduction based on the claim made.

The AO considered the difference being excess claim and disallowed the same while framing u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Act (the Act).

 Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A), who upheld the order of AO.

The Tribunal observed that the uncontroverted fact was that the loss occurred due to burglary which had taken place in assessee’s shop and FIR for loss due to burglary was lodged with the police authorities. The reason for disallowance by AO was that assessee had made an excess claim.

The Tribunal noted that there was no material to demonstrate that the claim of loss made by the assessee was excessive or bogus. Further, it was neither the case of Revenue that the complaint lodged with the police for burglary in the shop of assessee was false nor that the police stated in the report that the FIR lodged by the assessee was false.

Further it was not the case of Revenue that the claim lodged by the assessee with the Insurance Company had been reduced on account of the claim be false.

The Tribunal also noted that the contention of the assessee was that the Insurance Company calculated the insurance claim on the basis of average clause wherein the cost of goods lost as per the books is taken “at cost” and the calculation considered by Insurance Company was only for computation for payment of claim, was not found to be false.

Further the conclusion of the AO that assessee had made excess claim of loss was also not supported by any material evidence.

Accordingly, the Tribunal opined that the loss by burglary had arisen during the course of business and was hence allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Bank

State Bank of India elects four Directors in its Central Board

State Bank of India in its General Meeting of the Shareholders elected four Directors to the Central Board. The meeting…

9 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Declaration of additional income by increasing the WIP was not proper – ITAT

Voluntary declaration of additional income by increasing WIP was not proper, as assessee will take the additional benefit in the…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Cash payment for purchase of land or property not violation of 269SS or 269T

Cash payment for purchase of land or property cannot be treated as violation of provisions of section 269SS or 269T…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Excel Utility for ITR-1 and ITR-4 available for e-filing for AY 2026-27

Income Tax Department has released excel Utility for e-filing ITR-1 and ITR-4 for AY 2026-27 Excel utilities of ITR-1 and…

3 days ago
  • Insurance

Mediclaim amount not deductible from MACT award under medical expenses – SC

Amount of money received as Mediclaim not deductible from an award passed by MACT under the head of medical expenses.…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT jurisdiction is decided by location of AO passing the impugned order

Location of the assessing officer who passed the order shall decide the jurisdiction of the Bench of the Tribunal In…

4 days ago