9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts by the assessee have a link with any Indian defence contract payment. The income has not accrued or arisen in India. - Decided against revenue. Unexplained deposits in the ICICI Bank London - HELD THAT:- Assessing Officer was not sure about the year in which these deposits were made in those bank accounts. Finally, the Assessing Officer has held that in the absence of any required information amount appearing in the Column No.9 of the table showing the difference of the amount already added to the income of the assessee in the preceding Assessment Years to be added as income for the year under consideration. Assessing Officer has also recorded the fact that the status of the assessee as NRI during those years is not finally settled as pending before the Hon ble Supreme Court. Now the said dispute of NRI status is finally settled and the order of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court has been upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court as pointed out by the Ld. AR which was not disputed by the Ld. DR. As relying on own case [ 2016 (4) TMI 668 - ITAT DELHI] issue decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.4872/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2021 - Shri R.K.Panda, Accountant Member A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y taking the last known credit balance in the bank account as on May, 2006. Thus, after the May, 2006 there was no material available with the Assessing Officer to show whether any credit balance was available in the said bank account in the subsequent year and particularly for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer has not disputed the fact that the there is no bank statement available or any other information to show the status of existence or foreclosure of the bank account as on 31.03.2014. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has made addition on presumptive interest income of the assessee. On appeal, the assessee contended that the issue is covered by the order of the Tribunal for the AYs 2006-07 to 2009-10 and 2012-13. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition in para 4.3.2.2., which reads as under:- 4.3.2.2 The AO vide his letter F. No. ACIT/CC-3/2017- 18/88 dt. 08.05.2017 has sent the assessment folder and has submitted copy of the bank account statement of the appellant with HSBC Bank Geneva BUP_SIFI_PER_ID 9070144384 PERJD 17851 PER_NO 144384 wherein deposits in the nature of fiduciary deposits and liquid assets for the period November 2005 to February 2007 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e further note that this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the AYs 2006-07 to 2009-10 and 2012-13 has considered an identical issue vide order dated 22.02.2016 in ITA No.4802 to 4806/Del/2015 in para 10 to 13, as under:- 10. It was also submitted that the issue involved for these years is even otherwise covered by the judgement of the Hon ble Delhi High Court dated 25.02.2013, in ITA Nos.85/2013, 100/2013 and 87/2013 in the assessee s own case for AYs 2001-02, 2002-03 2003-04, wherein the assessee was held to be an NRI and deleted the addition in respect of the assessee s bank in Singapore holding that in absence of any evidence of accrual or receipt of income in India, foreign bank accounts of NRI cannot be subjected to tax in India. The relevant portions of the judgement of the Hon ble High Court read as under:- 6. We are left to consider the addition of ₹ 10,51,20,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act. In so far as the addition is concerned, the decision with regard to it would depend on whether the assessee is regarded as a resident or non-resident. In case he is regarded as resident, then, obviously, this addition would have to be made. But if he is regarded as a n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht on record any evidence to link the money brought into India or kept in foreign accounts by the assessee have a link with any Indian defence contract payment. The income has not accrued or arisen in India. We therefore, uphold the orders of the CIT(A) on this issue. 9. Even the issue of status of the assessee being NRI for the AYs 2001-02 to 2003-04 has been finally decided by the Hon ble Supreme Court as pointed out both the parties, therefore, following the earlier order of this Tribunal, we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is upheld. Accordingly, the ground no.2 of the Revenue s appeal is dismissed. 10. Ground no.3 is regarding the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained deposits in the ICICI Bank London was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). 11. We have heard the learned DR as well as Ld. AR and considered the relevant material on record. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee has pointed out that this issue was also decided by this Tribunal in assessee s own case for AYs 2006-07 and 2007-08, in favour of the assessee. 12. The Ld. DR has fairly accepted the fact that an identical issue w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court, as detailed in the WS and mentioned herein above at paras-3 4.3. The additions made being purely presumptive sans any evidence available with the AO/brought on record the additions on both accounts in respect of the above two bank accounts, HSBC Bank Geneva and ICICI Bank London. 14. We further note that this Tribunal for the AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, vide order dated 22.02.2016 (supra) has decided this issue in favour of the assessee in para 24-27 as under:- 24. For AYs 2007-08 2008-09 the common ground raised by the Revenue is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions of ₹ 1,15,40,179 (AY 2008- 09) and ₹ 3,61,47,562 (AY: 2007-08) made by the AO on account of unexplained deposits in ICICI, London. 25. The ld. CIT(A) held as under:- 8.3 The seventh ground of appeal in AY 2007-08 and the fourth ground of appeal in AY 2008-09 is against addition of₹ 3,61,47,562/- ₹ 1,15,40,179/-, respectively, being deposits in the bank account of the appellant held with ICICI Bank, London. It has been held by Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's case in the earlier appeals that moneys kept in accounts held by him outside India ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
