Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Issue was whether a fire insurance policy could be repudiated on the ground that burglary/theft preceded and allegedly caused the fire. The Court held that where loss is attributable to fire and there is no plea or proof of wilful act, foul play, or fraud by the insured, the cause of the fire is immaterial for coverage. Theft/burglary was not an exclusion under the specified peril of "Fire", and exclusions must be strictly construed; an exclusion under another clause could not defeat liability for an independently covered peril. The repudiation letter and the rejection order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for assessment of loss. - SC
Issue was whether a fire insurance policy could be repudiated on the ground that burglary/theft preceded and allegedly caused the fire. The Court held that where loss is attributable to fire and there is no plea or proof of wilful act, foul play, or fraud by the insured, the cause of the fire is immaterial for coverage. Theft/burglary was not an exclusion under the specified peril of "Fire", and exclusions must be strictly construed; an exclusion under another clause could not defeat liability for an independently covered peril. The repudiation letter and the rejection order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for assessment of loss. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.