TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of this letter was placed before us and the Assessing Officer has duly been confronted with this letter. Here is thus a case in which there is a credit in the bank account of the assessee, which is on account of a remittance from a foreign bank, on account of disbursements from a family trust, and there is no dispute about these factual aspect. The investment is thus reasonably explained and the application of Section 69 is out of question. We, therefore, approve the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) for this short reason alone. - decided against revenue - IT (SS)A No.278/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 18-10-2018 - Pramod Kumar Vice President And Mahavir Prasad JM For The Appellant : Aparna M. Agrawal For The Respondent : Mukesh M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erving as follows: 4.1 It is undisputed that the assessee is an NRI. It is also not disputed that the money has flown from her Bank account with the Barclays Bank of UK her as she is permanently residing at Kenya. In the submission made in the case of assessee, it has been submitted that the said Bank account was being operated by her father Shri Chaturbhai Patel and upon the death of her father; this Bank accent was being operated by her mother Smt. Sarlaben C. Patel, who were living in India since 1980. Thus, since the date of opening of said Bank account in the name of assessee, her parents were running operating the said Bank account from India. Therefore, the source of money deposited in the said Bank account by the parents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 75,59668/-. Under the circumstances, the undersigned has no alternate but to treat the credit entry of ₹ 75,59,668/-reflected in Bank account No.03410100007438 with Bank of Baroda, Ahmedabad, as unexplained investment of the assessee. Thus, owing to failure exclusively on the part of the assessee to substantiate the credit entry reflected in the above referred Bank account, the sum of ₹ 75,59,668/- is treated as deemed income of the assessee and taxed u/s.69 of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(l)(c) of the Act are initiated separately for concealment of income. 4. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) and also filed additional evidences about the nature of receipt from the Barc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontents of the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant it was noticed that the AO made some factual errors while mentioning that the account in Barclays Bank belonged to the appellant and the same was managed by her parents from India from the date of its creation. The correct factual position was that, as discussed above, the Trust was created by the father of the appellant prior to his coming back to India and settling here in 1980. Therefore, the Trust was managed by her father from U.K. before coming to settle in India. The appellant did not have any account in the Barclays Bank in U.K. for this purpose and as evidenced from the letter of the Barclays' Bank. As a matter of fact, the account in the bank was that of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 7. It is only elementary that so far as Section 69 is concerned it can come into play only when the assessee does not offer an explanation about the nature and source an investment made by him or if the explanation offered by him, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, is not satisfactory. We have noted that Barclays Bank, vide letter dated 8th April 2014, has confirmed that a remittance of GBP 90,000 was sent by wire transfer to your NRE account no. 0341010007438 with Bank of Baroda, SP Colony Branch, Ahmedabad, which was routed through Bank of Baroda Mumbai branch on 5th April 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bout the factual aspect that the disbursement from his family trust was received, by the non-resident beneficiary, in India. The trust was settled in 1974 and the distribution is made in 2007. On these facts, it also appears that entire amount of GBP 90,000 may not be the principal amount and a part of this may be attributable to accretion to the corpus of the trust, as the trust monies were held by the Barclays Bank for over three decades. All these details about the nature and backdrop of receipt, i.e. disbursement from a family trust, were before the Assessing Officer, and yet the Assessing Officer did not examine the taxability of income component, even if any, in the disbursement, which is admittedly received in India, nor a case was m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
