9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Admission of revised grounds in second appeal 2. Consideration of loss claimed due to flood 3. Technical delay in filing second appeal Analysis: 1. The assessee filed a second appeal with multiple grounds, but the authorized representative sought admission of revised concise grounds, conceding on an additional ground. The only ground remaining for consideration was related to the loss claimed due to flood. The Tribunal admitted the revised grounds and proceeded with the appeal. 2. The assessee, a grocery dealer who was murdered by militants, claimed a loss of Rs. 3,14,924 due to a flood in August 1989. Supporting documents included a certificate from the local health officer and police case details. Despite the AO's denial based on an executive officer's certificate, the Tribunal found no contradictory evidence to disprove the flood or police inquiry. Emphasizing the lack of substantive evidence against the assessee and the insurance compensation received, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the need to analyze each case's facts properly. 3. A technical irregularity regarding the payment of fees for filing the second appeal initially caused a delay, but the Departmental Representative agreed that it was not a case of delay. The Tribunal condoned the technical delay and admitted the appeal for further consideration. This decision allowed the appeal to proceed without being hindered by the technicality, ensuring a fair hearing for the assessee.
|
