Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
