9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (12) TMI 10 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of foreign resilience received by the assessee from M/s Gorkha Airlines Kathmandu Nepal despite the fact that the assessee had not furnished any relevant and cogent evidence to show that the said income has been earned abroad and it is not taxable in India - assessee claiming governance by the proviso to section 5(1) - Held that - CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition on observation that assessee was employed in Gorkha Airlines, Nepal as Sr. Captain during AY 2004-05 and retired on 23.2.2005 and the assessee was paid for finalizing the aircraft deal pertaining to Doniar Aircraft and for training the personnel to operate and maintain it and the assessee was also paid profit share in lieu of salary in installments after deduction of tax at source. It is observed that after due consideration of submissions and evidence submitted by the assessee and examined by the AO, the CIT(A) held that the entire amount had been properly explained by the appellant assessee and he deleted the addition on just and proper grounds - Decided against Revenue
Issues:
Revenue's appeal against deletion of addition made on foreign remittance received from M/s Gorkha Airlines, Nepal for A.Y. 2005-06. Analysis: Issue 1: Addition of foreign remittance to the income of the assessee by the AO. The AO added Rs.57,48,341 to the income of the assessee as foreign remittance received from M/s Gorkha Airlines, Nepal. The AO noted that the assessee did not furnish evidence to show that the income was earned abroad and not taxable in India. Issue 2: Deletion of addition by CIT(A). The CIT(A) deleted the addition after considering the submissions and evidence provided by the assessee. The CIT(A) directed the AO to verify whether the deposits were from the salary income received by the appellant from Gorkha Airlines. The CIT(A) found that the entire amount had been properly explained by the appellant, leading to the deletion of the addition. Issue 3: Arguments before the Tribunal. The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s decision, arguing that the deletion of the addition was erroneous as the assessee had not provided relevant evidence to prove that the income was earned abroad and not taxable in India. The Revenue contended that the AO's action was justified and requested the Tribunal to set aside the CIT(A)'s order. Issue 4: Assessee's defense and CIT(A)'s decision. The assessee's representative argued that the AO's action was arbitrary, and the CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition after considering the evidence submitted. The CIT(A) admitted the evidence following Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules 1962 and found the deletion of the addition justified based on the explanations provided by the assessee. Issue 5: Tribunal's decision. After hearing both parties and reviewing the material, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had rightly deleted the addition based on the explanations and evidence provided by the assessee. The Tribunal observed that the entire amount had been properly explained, and there was no justification for the AO's action. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition made by the AO on account of foreign remittance received from M/s Gorkha Airlines, Nepal for A.Y. 2005-06. The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of income, leading to the deletion of the addition.
|
