The Bombay high court (HC) ruled that a salary slip that mentions a standard deduction of the professional tax was enough proof of an employee salary slip if there is no income certificate given by the heads. state governments and Union territories impose the professional tax on all the salary-earning people and are restrained to Rs 2500 a year. A state or a UT would decide to not impose the same tax, however, levied in Maharashtra.
As per the observation, Bombay HC cancelled the petition of the insurance company which asks for the decree of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) in which the motor of a 26-year-old who died in an accident was given a compensation of Rs 40.22 lakh. The insurance, as well as the compensation, varies from each other. If a person has opted for third-party insurance, then in case of a vehicular accident or death, the insurance firm is forced to furnsih the compensation to the person for the vehicle damage and to the family of the victim.
The same compensation is being computed on the grounds of the financial loss that seems to be faced by the victim or their family for the remainder of their work tenure. There is no cap on the liability towards the injury or death in the 3rd party insurance, and the insurance company is forced to furnish the same.
Inside the same case, the single judge bench of Justice Bharati Dangre was said by the insurance companies’ advocate Rahul Mehta that MACT’s quantum of compensation was wrong because it rely on the salary slip. Mehta contended that beneath section 65-B of the evidence act, the electronic record submitted by the mother in a salary form certificate needs to be accompanied via a certificate revealing the electronic record as well as the concern where it was produced. But it was not filed by the mother prior to the MACT, the Tribunal shall not lay on the salary slip only to attain the compensation amount.
But, the mother’s lawyer, Baliram Kamble mentioned that she has given MACT with her deceased son’s Form 16 moreover to the salary slip, which mentioned the salary after the deduction of the professional tax. Hence he opposed it, but a certificate is needed beneath the evidence act was not submitted, and the MACT does not done any mistake to attain the quantum of compensation.
The deceased man, a gym instructor was riding on a motorcycle when he gets hit by the truck dated Jan 18, 2018, at Khardi village in Thane district, around 90km northeast of Mumbai on National Highway 160. But he was transferred to the hospital in Mumbra he died because his injuries were too severe, after that his mother applied for compensation to MACT, Thane.
justice Dangre found in her order, “The learned counsel has justified in submitting that the salary certificate, which is extracted from the computer is not accompanied by the certificate issued under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, making it inadmissible in evidence. However, the I.T. Return, which depicts the salary of the employee, is conclusive proof of his earnings and by deducting the profession tax of ₹200/- per month, which comes to Rs.2,400/-.”
She also stated that “In my considered opinion, the Tribunal was perfectly justified in computing the income based on I.T. Return Form No.16. Since no legal infirmity can be found in the impugned order, the appeal deserves a dismissal.”
The bench then rendered that the claimant should be paid a compensation amount deposited in the Tribunal including the interest and dismissed the petition.
