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

  • ICAI

Empanelment of ICAI Exam observer for January 2027 Examinations. Last date: 20.11.2026

Empanelment to act as ICAI exam observers for January 2027 CA Examination. Last date to apply is 20.11.2026 Empanelment of…

2 days ago
  • GST

No arrest under GST- Major decision of 57th Meeting of GST Council held on 8th October 2026

No arrest under GST- Major decision taken in 57th Meeting of the GST Council on 8th October 2026 PRESS RELEASE…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Later SC ruling cannot render an act done in compliance of a court order a statutory default

A subsequent Apex Court ruling on the substantive issue cannot retrospectively make an act done in compliance of a binding…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Interest payment on mobilisation advance to NHAI not liable to TDS u/s 194A

Interest payment on mobilisation advance to NHAI not liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 194A - ITAT Interest…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Typographical error in turnover accepted during assessment not a mistake apparent from record

Typographical error in turnover declared in ITR was not as a mistake apparent from the record u/s 154 when AO…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

Plea that assessee was not aware of order cannot be brushed aside in absence of proof of service

Ground taken by assessee that he was not aware of the order cannot be brushed aside so lightly in absence…

7 days ago