9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as filed before the learned ITO. The receipt of salary was shown as per certificate at Rs. 6,336, and business commission at Rs. 2,25,544. Assessee appears to have filed during the course of hearing before the learned ITO a claim u/s 80U of the I.T. Act, 1961. The learned ITO noted the commission receipts from 1975-76 to 1981-82. The learned ITO further noted that the disease from which the assessee was suffering namely Anginea-Moderate Hypertension did not amount to a heart disease and the assessee could not be called a heart patient. It was also noted that the assessee was appointed as sales supervisor for the State ofU.P.and was earning substantial commission. The assessee appears to have produced two medical certificates during the assessment proceedings. The learned ITO noted that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions necessary for allowing relief u/s 80U of the Act and further noting the amount of commission received during the year under consideration, disallowed the assessee's claim u/s 80U of the Act. 3. The denial of assessee's claim u/s 80U of the Act was subsequently contested by the assessee. It was submitted before the learned CIT(A) by Shri T.N. Agarwal, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... achievement was due to the occurrence of the disease, it would still not be enough be bring the case within the ambit of section 80U because section 80U speaks of a ' substantial ' reduction in the assessee's capacity to engage in gainful employment or occupation. Certainly the above chart does not indicate any such substantial reduction, nor does the fact that the appellant is still discharging his functions in relation to the area assigned to him and still earning substantial commission which exceed Rs. 2,00,000 give such indication. In fact, section 80U is, in my opinion, not meant to cover cases like this. It will be seen that clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 80U speaks of an assessee who is totally blind and clause (ii) speaks of other permanent physical disabilities. Obviously, sec. 80U is meant to give a small recompense to assessees who have been visited by a grave misfortune and an assessee who has been spared such a calamity should not make an effort to somehow by recourse to legal verbiage, try to bring his case within the ambit of the concerned section." 4. The assessee is now in further appeal before us against the said finding of the learned CIT(A). Shri O. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y applicable to the pending cases. 6. In reply the learned counsel Shri Sapra contended that the Rule supra did not apply as the assesses was suffering from permanent disability. 7. Submissions made on behalf of the contesting parties have been heard and considered and record carefully perused. As discussed earlier he was working with M/s. J.B. Modi Brothers and was receiving salary and commission. A chart showing sales targets and achievements of the assessee since 1977-78 was produced before the lower authorities in the following manner : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Years Targets Sales % of Growth Penalty No. of Commission lac. achieve- achv. over med. earned ment in last rep. lac. year --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1977-78 60.00 60.51 100% 26% Nil 13 93,088 1978- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limb, or (b) permanent disability of more than 60 per cent in two or more limbs ; or (c) permanent deafness with hearing impediments of 71 decibles and above ; or (d) permanent and total loss of voice. 11. No doubt, Rule 110 was inserted with effect from1-4-85but being merely of procedural nature, in our view, was applicable to all the pending assessments. In fact the right emanates from this section and the Rule provides only as to what could constitute evidence in support of the claim. 12. In the light of the above discussion the certificates brought on record on behalf of the assessee are required to be read in the light of Rule 11D of the Rules. The assessee is said to be under treatment as a patient of Anginea-Moderate Hypertension and Coronary insufficiency. When these two situations are read simultaneously with the four situations mentioned in the Rule, it becomes more than clear that the assessee's case was not at all covered by the contents of the Rule. These are the inferences after perusing the medical certificates and the Rule. No doubt the assessee has brought medical certificates from the registered medical practitioners but the contents thereof did not sat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
