Case Law Details
Natarajan Purushothaman Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that he used to bring cash during visits to India and it was customary to provide some cash to the parents during such visit. The Ld. CIT(A), inter-alia, observed that the deposits of Rs.3.45 Lacs was stated to funded out of earlier withdrawals and transfer from western union. It was possible that some cash might have been saved by the family which was later on deposited in the bank account. Considering the same, allowance of 4 Lacs could be granted to the assessee and therefore, the balance addition of Rs.2 Lacs was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Upon careful consideration, we find that the assessee is employed in Dubai and occasionally visit India to meet elderly parents. The assessee does not have any source of income in Therefore, the explanation that some cash was saved by the parents and it was deposited in the bank account could be considered as valid explanation of the source. This amount could not be considered as unexplained income of the assessee considering the fact that he is a non-resident. Therefore, by deleting the addition of Rs.2 Lacs, we allow the appeal.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 15-11-2021 in the matter of assessment framed by Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.144 of the Act on 24-12-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of Rs.2 Lacs. Having heard rival submissions, our adjudication would be as under.
2. The assessee is stated to be non-resident Indian employed in Dubai since 2011. The assessee and his wife live in Dubai and visit India on regular intervals to meet his elderly parents. The assessee was assessed u/s 144 on 24.12.2019 and saddled with addition of Rs.6 Lacs u/s 69A. It transpired that the assessee made deposit of Rs.15 Lacs in Bank account which was stated to be funded out of lease rent advance and withdrawals from bank account / remittances from abroad. A reference was made to Addl. CIT (International Taxation), Range-2 seeking directions u/s 144A. As per the directions, Ld. AO was directed to consider the sum of Rs.6 Lacs as unexplained money u/s 69A.
3. During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that he used to bring cash during visits to India and it was customary to provide some cash to the parents during such visit. The Ld. CIT(A), inter-alia, observed that the deposits of Rs.3.45 Lacs was stated to funded out of earlier withdrawals and transfer from western union. It was possible that some cash might have been saved by the family which was later on deposited in the bank account. Considering the same, allowance of 4 Lacs could be granted to the assessee and therefore, the balance addition of Rs.2 Lacs was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
4. Upon careful consideration, we find that the assessee is employed in Dubai and occasionally visit India to meet elderly parents. The assessee does not have any source of income in Therefore, the explanation that some cash was saved by the parents and it was deposited in the bank account could be considered as valid explanation of the source. This amount could not be considered as unexplained income of the assessee considering the fact that he is a non-resident. Therefore, by deleting the addition of Rs.2 Lacs, we allow the appeal.
5. The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order.
Order pronounced on 07th July, 2022.
