Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Arun Kochhar, C/o Vinod Kumar Bindal & Co. Versus DCIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi

2017 (12) TMI 347 - ITAT DELHI

Resident in India - Taxability in India - period of stay in India - requirement to file return on India - Held that:- The assessee’s presence in India was only for 31 days in the relevant previous year. When, the assessee who is an U.S.A. citizen since 14.9.1999; and is living in USA since 1974; and his presence in India during the relevant previous year is less than 182 days, then in terms of section 6, the assessee cannot be held to be resident in India. The findings of the Learned CIT(Appeals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

US $ 7,000/- in ICICI Bank, New Delhi, we find that the assessee being an NRI was entitled to bring US $ 10,000 without any declaration in terms of Baggage Rules as given under FEMA. Thus the assessee being an American citizen who is otherwise permitted to convey US $ 10,000 in India without any explanation then the same cannot be taxed in India. Otherwise also, to be taxable in India, assessee has to be resident of India within the scope and meaning of section 6. Thus, on the merits we hold tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

IAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Smt. Sweety Kothari, Advocate For The Revenue : Shri Anup Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the above named appellant against impugned order dated 10.05.2011, passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-III, New Delhi, for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for the A.Y. 2002-03. In the grounds of appeal the assessee has raised following grounds:- 1. That in the circumstance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by not following the order of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Delhi) for quashing the assessment proceedings as time barred. Therefore, the same should be quashed. 4. The assessment order is bad in law and on facts as it has been framed a) without proper enquiry as per objections raised during the assessment proceedings to bring on record the hidden facts, and b) without confronting the man .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming an addition of ₹ 3,42,020/- (US$ 7,000/-) for the deposits made in the bank account # 5- 04/939-003 with Citibank on 30/04/2001 ignoring the then prevalent Baggage Rules. Thus, the addition made must be deleted. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming an addition of ₹ 8,77,23,967/- (US$ 17,95,414.84) for the balance lying as on 31/12/01 in LGT Bank account in Tiechtenstein in the name of Urvashi Foundation 9490 Vad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ppellant. Thus, the addition made on the basis of said conversion rate must be deleted. 9. That the assessment order along with the notice of demand is void ah initio as it is time barred not framed before the limitation period and is beyond the authority of law as prescribed u/s 292BB of the Act. Thus, the same should be quashed. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the appellant, the impugned assessment order framed on surmises and conjectures is illegal which deserves to be quashed and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee was present in India in the relevant previous year. In pursuance thereof, the Assessing Officer has submitted his remand report the copy of which has also been provided to the assessee. In the said remand report the Assessing Officer has clearly admitted that during the relevant previous year assessee was in India for 31 days. On this background Ld. Counsel argued that when the assessee is an NRI and a citizen of USA, then the addition which has been made by the Assessing Officer could .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dia in terms of section 6 being a non-resident Indian, then no such amount can be taxed in the hands of the assessee. The remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer clearly points out that the assessee was not resident in India during the relevant previous year, therefore, there is no question of making any addition in the hands of the assessee. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR strongly relied upon the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals) and Assessing Officer. 4. We have heard the rival subm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ank, Liechtenstein in which an amount of $17,95,414.84/- (Rs. 8,77,23,967/- @ ₹ 48.86 per $ at the average rate for financial year 2001-02) was deposited. Since the amount deposited in the bank and the interest accrued thereon was not declared and no return of income was filed by the assessee in India, therefore, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 (dated 26.3.2009) on some last known address of the assessee in Delhi. The assessee s claim throughout had been that, since he was an N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

years preceding that year been in India for a period or periods amounting in all 365 days or more, is in India for a periods amounting in all 60 days or more in that year. He wanted to ascertain residential status of the assessee right from the financial year 1997-98 to 2000-01. However, as per the Assessing Officer no information in this regard was furnished by the assessee and accordingly, he rejected the assessee s claim that he was an NRI assessee could not established (his status). Thus, he .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er 1974 and has been holding American citizenship since 14.09.1999. It has been stated that in the year under consideration the appellant was in India for 27 days and in Assessment Year 2001-02 for 43 days and, Assessment Year 2000-01 for 29 days. A photocopy of the passport has been enclosed in the paper book. However, neither in the assessment proceedings and nor in the appellate proceedings, the original passport was produced despite specific requirements of the Assessing Officer. It is also .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

relevant to this period are available with him only, the non-production of the best evidence in the shape of original passport indicates that he is deliberately not producing them as the same would create doubts about his residential status. In absence of any proof being furnished by assessee, and on the basis of circumstantial evidence, I confirm the status of the assessee as resident and, ordinary resident for the period relevant to assessment year 2002-03. I am in agreement with the conclusio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. On the facts of the appellant, the period, of stay being un-verifiable, therefore the ground raised is dismissed. 4. To ascertain the correct facts during the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal, a remand report was called upon from the Assessing Officer after verifying the original passport of the assessee and to ascertain the number of days the assessee was present in India. In response, the Assessing Officer has submitted following remand report vide his letter dated 11.8.2017. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Since the compliance of above direction of ITAT has to be submitted by the AO. I have asked the AR to produce passport in original to verify the same, In response Ms, Sweety Kothari, AR of Sh. Arun Kochhar appeared alongwith passport in original which has been examined and following position emerged on verification :- S. no. AY Place Date of arrival Date of departure No. of day Page no. of passport for arrival Page no. of passport for departure A. 2002-03 Chennai 15.04.2001 17.04.2011 3 10 68 20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Income Tax Central Circle -31, New Delhi 6. From the aforesaid report it is evidently clear that the assessee s presence in India was only for 31 days in the relevant previous year. Whence, the assessee who is an U.S.A. citizen since 14.9.1999; and is living in USA since 1974; and his presence in India during the relevant previous year is less than 182 days, then in terms of section 6, the assessee cannot be held to be resident in India. The findings of the Learned CIT(Appeals) as well as th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version