GYANA VAJRA SAKYA,JAIPUR V. DDIT/ ADIT( INTL) 1 DDN, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

ITA 108/DDN/2025

AI Insights

Gyana Vajra Sakya, the appellant, contested the final orders passed under sections 147/144C(13) of the Income Tax Act by the Dy. Director/Assistant Director of Income Tax (INTL)-1, Dehradun, for the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The primary issue was the taxability of deposits in his NRE account, which were claimed to be remittances from abroad and not accrued or received in India. The Tribunal considered the appellant's status as an NRI and the source of the funds, ultimately deciding in favor of the appellant based on the provisions of the Income Tax Act and relevant judicial precedents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 847445 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Dehradun
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Nitin Mavji Vekariya Vs. ITO
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHANLAL JOSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAT CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Residential status
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.108 & 109/Ddn/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEARS 2014-15 & 2015-16) Gyana Vajra Sakya, C/o Raghuveer Singh Poonia, D-82B, Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302015 PAN-BDBPS0514G Vs. DDIT/ADIT (INTL)-1, Aaykar Bhawan, 13- A, Subhash Road Dehradun-248001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajat Choudhary, Adv. Shri Rahul Jain, CA Department by Shri Mohan Lal Joshi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 25.03.2026 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: These two separate appeals are filed by the assessee against the final orders passed u/s 147/144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, in short) by the Dy. Director/Assistant Director of Income Tax (INTL)-1, Dehradun (referred to as ‘the AO’) dated 29.11.2022 and 30.11.2022 for the Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively. 2. Since the issue involved in both the appeals are similar therefore, they are taken together and decided by a common order. 3. It is observed that both the appeals are filed delayed by 861 days. Before us, an application for condonation of delay was filed duly Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT supported by the affidavit of the assessee. In the said petition, it is stated by the assessee that he belonged to Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism and Head of Sakya School Tibetan Buddhism since year 2022. The appellant was not aware about the assessment orders passed and demand created against him since he was constantly traveling out of India to perform his duty as the head of the school. For the purpose of visa when returns of income were filed for three Assessment Years, Ld. Counsel for the assessee informed him about the outstanding demands for impugned assessment years under appeal. The assessee thereafter, obtained the copies of the draft assessment orders, DRP orders and final assessment orders from the Jurisdictional Assessing officer and filed the appeal with the delay of 861 days. Assessee also filed copy of his passport and chart containing the period of his stay in India and submits that to perform the social duties, he normally traveled out of India and thus, was not aware of the passing of the orders. Under these circumstances, it is requested to condone the delay being bonafide and having sufficient reasons. 4. Per contra, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue opposed the request of the assessee for condonation of inordinate delay in filing the appeals for both the years. 5. After considering the arguments of both the parties, we find that there is reasonable and sufficient cause with the assessee in filing the appeals for both the assessment years, delayed by 861 days each. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT It must be remembered that in every case of delay, there can be some lapses on the part of the litigant concerned however, that alone is not enough to turn down the plea of assessee and to shut the doors against him. When the explanation does not smack of mala fide or it is not put forth as a part of dilatory strategy, the Courts must give utmost consideration to such litigant and its right of hearing of the appeal on merit ought not to be rejected. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the larger interest of justice, delay in filling the appeals for both the assessment years is hereby condoned and appeals of the assessee are taken for adjudication on merits. 6. In both the appeals, all the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are with respect to the addition made towards deposits in the bank accounts. 7. Before us the ld. AR for the assessee submits that the assessee was NRI during both the assessment years under appeal before us and had maintained NRE account with HSBC bank. A chart containing date-wise travel history of the assessee is also filed in support of the claim that the assessee was NRI during the years under appeal. In the NRE account, funds were transferred from outside India which was explained as generated from the sale of property at Australia. It is the claim of the assessee that immediate source of these deposits is neither accrued in India nor was received in India and thus was not taxable in India. Ld. AR further submits Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT that the immediate source of the credits in NRE account of the assessee are transfer of funds from outside India and in support placed copy of the permanent residency certificate issued by Government of Switzerland on record and claimed that assessee was NRI during the impugned assessment years. Ld. AR submits that AO has invoked the provisions of section 69A of the Act by ignoring the fact that the funds from transferred from his own bank account with HSDC Bank, Sydney and this fact remained undisputed. Ld. AR refers RBI guidelines issued under FEMA in the year 2016 as per which “No Indian income can be deposited in a NRE bank account”. Copy of the same is placed at pages 17-23 of the paper book. He, therefore requested that no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee being NRI u/s 6 of the Act for the deposits in NRE account being remittance from outside India. 8. Per contra, Ld. Sr DR for the Revenue submits that the AO has observed that assessee has not filed any evidences with respect to his residential status nor filed any tax residency certificate to discharge the onus casted upon him of satisfying the AO that the income from the sale of property at Australia has suffered tax in any of the country. He therefore, requested to confirm the orders of lower authorities. 9. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, the sole issue is regarding the taxability of credits in the bank account transferred from outside India by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT It was the claim of assessee that funds were transferred from his bank account outside India and were deposited in NRE account. As per the assessee, he was NRI during both the previous year relevant to assessment years under appeal and filed permanent resident card issued by the Government of Switzerland. Assessee also filed date- wise chart to prove that during both the previous years relevant to assessment years before us, assessee remained outside India for more than 182 days and thus, has enjoyed the NRI status. 10. Once the fact that Assessee was NRI is not in dispute, the income accrued and received outside India cannot be subjected to tax in India. Undisputedly, the funds were received from outside India and assessee being NRI and immediate source of such funds is from the income earned and received outside India, under these circumstances the same cannot be taxed in India since it was neither accrued in India nor received in India and the same was transferred from his bank account maintained outside India. As per Section 10(4) of the Act income earned outside India and deposited into NRE account remains free from Indian taxation. Further u/s 10(4)(ii) of the Act, interest income generated on funds originated from foreign sources is exempted. The Assessing Officer made additions based on credits in the assessee’s NRE account, treating them as unexplained income. The assessee has provided documentation showing that the funds were foreign remittances and hence should not be considered taxable under Indian law. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT 11. In the case of Nitin Mavji Vekariya Vs. ITO reported in 461 ITR 18 (Gujarat), the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has held as under:- 5 “Undisputedly, the funds came from NRE Accounts and the source therefore was beyond the reach of the authorities. Even on reading the provisions of section 10(4), it is apparent that such incomes are exempt from being included in the total income. 6 The impugned orders dated 29.03.2022 in all these petitions are, therefore, without jurisdiction. The orders dated 29.03.2022 in the respective petitions are therefore quashed and set aside. Petitions are allowed, accordingly. Rule is made absolute accordingly, with no orders as to costs.” 12. In the light of above facts and by respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Nitin Mavji Vekariya (Supra), the additions made in the hands of assessee towards the deposits in NRE bank account are hereby, deleted. 13. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/DDN/2025 for AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively, are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.03.2026. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 25.03.2026 *Amit Kumar,Sr. PS* Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No.108 & 109 /Ddn/2025 Gyan Vajra Sakya vs. DDIT Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "