TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 641
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, AOR For the Respondent(s): Mr. Kshitij Mittal, Adv. Mr. Anand Sukumar, AOR Mr. Salil Paul, Adv. Ms. Manjeet Chawla, AOR Mr. Sahil Paul, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Dayal, Adv. Ms. Jyoti, Adv. Mr. Harmeet Singh Phillip, Adv. Mr. Raghav Nagar, Adv. JUDGMENT PER SANJAY KAROL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.04.2024 passed in MACA No. 452 of 2023 by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, which, in turn was preferred against the order dated 24.02.2023 in MAC Case No. 92/2019 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ['MACT'.], Behrampur ['the Tribunal'.]. 3. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 29.05.2018, the deceased, namely Mr. Manoranjan Pandey, aged 39 years, was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....' was applied, considering the age of the deceased. The Tribunal further awarded compensation towards conventional heads, in accordance with law. 7. Aggrieved thereof, Respondent No. 2 the Insurance Company filed an appeal before the High Court seeking reduction in compensation awarded by the Tribunal. It was submitted therein that the Tribunal erred in computing the income of the deceased and applied the wrong multiplier, as the age of the deceased was 39 as per his PAN card. 8. The High Court, vide, the impugned judgment, allowed the appeal and reduced the compensation awarded by an amount of Rs. 39,24,914/- to Rs. 1,87,75,150/- along with 6% interest per annum. The Court reduced his annual income as Rs. 13,33,226/-. For this purpos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h pattern and nature of business [Nature of business would also include businesses and professions where negative income in the initial years is common and does not reflect the true financial standing of the individual.] also warrant consideration. Moreover, in cases where the ITR has been filed after the death, it would be appropriate to call for the ITRs for the past three years along with balance sheets of the concerned person/entity. 14. Mr. Salil Paul, learned amicus curiae has submitted that this Court in ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar Mohanty and Anr. (2018) 3 SCC 686., relied upon the average income of the ITRs for the previous three years to compute the income of the claimant therein. 15. At the outset....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 13. In Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [(2013) 9 SCC 65], a three-Judge Bench of this Court held that the purpose of award of compensation under section 166 read with section 168 of the Act is to place the distressed dependents of the victim of a fatal road accident, if the victim had been the sole bread earner, in almost the same position financially if he lived his natural span of life. It is obviously not intended to put such distressed dependents in a better financial position in which they would otherwise have been if the accident had not occurred. At the same time, the determination of compensation is not an exact science and the exercise involves an assessment based on estimation and conjectures, here and there, as many imponde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t have completed a year in the promoted position before the accident or might not have filed ITR for such period. In such cases the Court concerned shall take reference to the promotion letter and other corroboratory financial statements. 19. When it comes to self-employed / individuals carrying out their own business, in our view, the average of the income specified in the ITRs of up to the previous three years is to be taken as a reference point for assessment of annual income from their business. There may also be a scenario where only one or two ITRs have been filed. Given such scenarios and the fluctuation of income in these professions, surrounding circumstances are also to be taken into consideration. These would include: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/-. In view thereof, the compensation payable to the claimant-appellants would be as follows: CALCULATION OF COMPENSATION Compensation Heads Amount Awarded In Accordance with: Yearly Income Rs.14,00,000/- Future Prospects (40%) (Age being 39) 14,00,000/- + 5,60,000/- = Rs.19,60,000/- National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 Para 37, 39, 41, 42 and 59.4 Deduction (1/3) 19,60,000 - 6,53,333 = Rs.13,06,667/- Multiplier (15) 13,06,667 x 13 = Rs.83,82,582/- Loss of Income of the Deceased Rs. 1,96,00,005 Loss of Estate Rs. 18,150/- (10% increase) National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 Para 59.8 Loss of Funeral Expenses ....