#income estimation

The Bombay High Court set a precedent for estimating income in motor accident claims when tax records are absent, ruling that a doctor’s earnings must be assessed reasonably - not arbitrarily low - with a 15% future prospects addition and 7% interest. This clarifies how tribunals should balance professional status against evidentiary gaps, impacting claimants in similar cases nationwide.

HP High Court rules that motor accident compensation must be calculated based on documented income tax returns, rejecting oral testimony. The court also clarifies that only 1/4th (not 1/3rd) of income should be deducted for personal expenses when four dependents exist, enhancing compensation to ₹24.67 lakh with 7.5% interest. This sets a precedent for evidence-based income assessment in tort claims.

ITAT Delhi sets aside income tax assessment under Section 144, ruling that estimation of income based on unverified subscriber data violates statutory requirements. The decision reinforces that tax authorities must conduct thorough verification before resorting to best judgment assessment, impacting cable operators and similar service providers facing tax disputes.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that while precise income proof is ideal under BNSS Section 144, courts may consider holistic circumstances-including education, earning capacity, and familial obligations-to avoid arbitrary maintenance awards. The judgment underscores that assumptions alone cannot substitute for documentary evidence, ensuring fairness in family law proceedings.

Punjab & Haryana High Court holds that in motor accident claims, income of deceased need not be proven by documents if oral evidence aligns with minimum wage norms and economic reality.