9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (9) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TO with the following observation: "The assessee has further claimed deduction under s. 80-U to the tune of Rs. 10,000. The assessee has filed copy of the certificate from Dr. V.L. Kocher who has certified that the assessee is suffering from post-polio paralysis of right lower extremity with foot drops and as such physically handicapped person. The assessee was asked to explain that how it is a permanent physical disability entitling the assessee to claim deduction under s. 80U. Because the nature of the disability mentioned in the certificate firstly does not state that the disability is permanent and secondly it has not been certified that this disability has substantially reduced his capacity to engage in the gainful employment or occ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is against that finding of the learned AAC. On behalf of the Revenue the learned departmental representative supported the assessment order on the point. On behalf of the assessee naturally the impugned findings was supported and outpatient ticket from the Irwin Hospital, New Delhi dt. 1st Nov., 1976 was also produced. It was the assessee's case before us that he was physically handicapped person and that the disability was permanent. According to the learned counsel the wrong finding was rightly vacated by the learned first appellate authority. 7. Rival submission have been heard and considered and record carefully perused. The assessee is said to be a civil contractor. The assessment order indicates that the assessee has progressed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring with some disease which caused the permanent physical disability reducing the assessee's capacity to be engaged in the gainful employment. This is what exactly not seen to have been done. The finding of the learned AAC is, therefore, erroneous on account of that. The assessee's case, in our view, does not also get any support from the outpatient ticket dt. 1st Nov., 1976 as in that only 20 days bed rest is seen to have been advised without mentioning that the assessee was suffering from the type of disease mentioned in r. 11D of the IT Rules. In any case the ticket dt. 1st Nov., 1976 does not pertain to the assessment year under consideration either. In view of our above discussion we are constrained to hold that the learned AAC was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
