R.Gajan Kumar Chawda , CHENNAI v. ITO International Taxation 1(1) , CHENNAI

ITA 2009/CHNY/2017 | 2013-2014
Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2017 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 200921714 RSA 2017
Assessee PAN ABDPC0454G
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 2009/CHNY/2017
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant R.Gajan Kumar Chawda , CHENNAI
Respondent ITO International Taxation 1(1) , CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 02-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 02-11-2017
Assessment Year 2013-2014
Appeal Filed On 18-08-2017
Judgment Text
C/ SMC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/SMC BENCH CHENNAI . BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.2009 /MDS./2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHRI R.GAJAN KUMAR CHAWDA FLAT NO.F.D.NO.2/280 SRICHARAN APARTMENTS KARPAGAMBAL NAGAR FIRST STREET KOTTIVAKKAM CHENNAI 600 041 VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1(1) CHENNAI. PAN ABDPC 0454 G ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.A.S.SRIRAMAN ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN JCIT D.R ! ' / DATE OF HEARING : 02.11.2017 #$%& ! ' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.11.2017 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-16 CHENN AI DATED 15.05.2017 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. ITA NO. 2009/MDS/2017 2 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS FOR A DJUDICATION. 1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) 16 CHENNAI DATED 15.05.2017 IN LT.A.NO.45!CIT(A)-16/2013-14 FO R THE ABOVE MENTIONED ASSESSMENT YEAR IS CONTRARY TO LAW FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ASSESS MENT OF SALARY INCOME EARNED IN THE COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE TOTAL INCOME W ITHOUT ASSIGNING PROPER REASONS AND JUSTIFICATION. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSMENT OF SALARY INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT WAS WRONG ERR ONEOUS UNJUSTIFIED INCORRECT AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. 4. THE CIT (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT HAVI NG TAKEN ON RECORD THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING THE SOURCE FOR THE SALARY AS WELL AS THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING THE STATUS OF THE APPELLANT AS NON-RES IDENT THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SALARY INCOME WAS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. 5. THE CIT (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THER E WAS NO PROPER OPPORTUNITY GIVEN BEFORE PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED OR DER AND ANY ORDER PASSED IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES NATURAL JUSTI CE WOULD BE NULLITY IN LAW. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 DECLARING NIL INCOME AND CLAIMED A REFUND OF ` 9 55 420/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. THE AO DISALLOWED AN AMOUNT OF ` 36 58 064/- ITA NO. 2009/MDS/2017 3 THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED FOR THE SALARY INCOME AS NO P ROOF WAS PRODUCED BYTHE ASSESSEE THAT HE WAS IN FOREIGN/INTE RNATIONAL WATERS FOR THE SPECIFIED PERIOD DURING F.Y 2012-13. THE AO ASSESSED THE INCOME AT ` 34 08 640/- BY ADDING ` 36 58 064/- AS SALARY INCOME. AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICE R THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). 3. DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSE SSEE PRODUCED A COPY OF PASSPORT AND A COPY OF ADVICE FROM MASTE R FOR THE PAYMENTS IN DOLLARS. THE LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT I T CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A SUFFICIENT PROOF SATISFYING THE CON DITION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS THE EMPLOYEE OF M/S.ESSAR SHIPPING LTD . AND THE ASSESSEE WAS IN INTERNATIONAL WATER DURING THE PERI OD 01.04.2012 TO 31.03.2013. ACCORDINGLY THE LD.CIT(A) REJECTED TH E CLAIM OF ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. IN MY OPINION IT IS APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO IN ORDER TO EXAMINE THE CERTIFICATE FROM EMPLOYE R I.E. M/S.ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS THE EMPLOYEE AND WAS IN INTERNATIONAL WATER DURING THE PERIOD FROM 0 1.04.2012 TO ITA NO. 2009/MDS/2017 4 31.03.2013. IF THE ASSESSEE PRODUCES THESE PROOFS BY WAY OF CERTIFICATE THE AO HAS TO EXAMINE THIS AND DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 02 ND NOVEMBER 2017. SD/- ( ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 2 ND NOVEMBER 2017 . K S SUNDARAM. ' ( )!*+ +%! / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ' ' -! () / CIT(A) 5. +0 1 )!)23 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ' ' -! / CIT 6. 1 45 6 / GF