9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (9) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis and the extent was stated to be 60%. This was the certificate dated 29-12-1983 given by Dr. A.C. Reddy, Civil Surgeon, Orthopaedics, Government General Hospital, Guntur. Another certificate dated 4-12-1986 from Dr. V. Bhaskara Rao, Orthopaedic Surgeon, Government General Hospital, Guntur, was filed which shows that the assessee had an attack of poliomyelitis in his childhood affecting the left lower limb and he had got paralysis of entire left lower limb with loss of power of the left hip, knee and ankle joints. According to the ITO, both the certificates nowhere certified that the assessee had been suffering from a permanent physical disability conforming to rule 11D(a) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. According to him, it was only a par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally reducing his capacity to engage in gainful employment. Had he not been suffering from the disability, he would have employed himself in a more gainful employment. 4. The learned departmental representative, on the other hand, supporting the order of the DC (Appeals), submitted that the mere fact that the assessee has been in gainful employment is sufficient to take the case of the assessee out of the provisions of section 80U. According to him, no interference is called for in the orders of the departmental authorities. 5. I have heard the parties and considered the rival submissions. Section 80U entitles an assessee to claim a deduction if he is either totally blind or suffers from a permanent disability which has the effect of re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffects the capacity of a person - the capacity not only for moving about but also for achieving one's goals in various walks of life. In income-tax language, it affects and/or reduces the capacity of an assessee to be gainfully employed. The mere fact that the assessee in the present case is a lecturer in a college and is earning such income as other lecturers having both the limbs are earning does not mean that the loss of his one limb did not affect or reduce his capacity to be gainfully employed. One should not close one's enquiry by just knowing what a person is but should extend the horizon of one's vision to find out what he could have been had he not lost his limb. A lot of hurdles. obstacles and non-cooperative attitude and behaviou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a gainful employment should not be judged by the fact, as their Lordships of the Allahabad High Court held, that he was earning income. It should be judged by the extent of the impairment of the limb. The assessee is certified to be permanently disabled by loss of 60% of his one limb. This, in my opinion, can be termed as "substantial". This is what has been held by the Tribunal in the decisions referred to above. It may also be mentioned that the Board has issued a Circular No. 375 [F.No. 178/17/83-IT (A-I)) allowing deduction under section 80U in certain circumstances, wherein also no further condition is prescribed to determine that the said disability or impairment of a limb should further be proved to be affecting substantially the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
