INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD V. TANMAI RAJ GOPAL, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1887/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against the order of the CIT(A) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which pertained to the assessment year 2022-23. The primary issues revolved around the deletion of capital gains from the assessee's income and the determination of the assessee's residential status for tax purposes. The CIT(A) had found that the assessee, Tanmai Raj Gopal, was not a resident of India during the relevant period and thus not liable to pay tax in India on certain incomes, including capital gains from shares of Hasura Inc. The Tribunal's decision affirmed the CIT(A)'s order, noting that the Assessing Officer had accepted the assessee's explanations and found no discrepancies in the reported income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839572 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMIKSHA YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: RIGNESH DAS
• Keywords: Set aside; Capital Gains; Double taxation relief
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1887/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad Vs. Tanmai Raj Gopal, 104, Kalhaar Exotica, Off. Science City Road, Sola, Ahmedabad-380060 [PAN No.AMZPG3744N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Samiksha Yadav, AR Respondent by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 24.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 26.02.2026 O R D E R PER: ANNAPURNA GUPTA - AM: The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi dated 07.08.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2022-23. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed an application seeking adjournment but on hearing the Ld. DR it was revealed that there was no case with the Revenue against the order passed by Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the application filed by the assessee was rejected. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1887/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Tanmai Raj Gopal Asst.Year –2022-23 - 2 - 3. Coming to the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue are as under: “1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the capital gains of Rs. 9,25,60,844/- from the computation sheet without appreciating the facts of the case? 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessee is not a “RESIDENT” of India during the year under consideration and that the assessee was not liable to pay tax in India but in the USA for the year under consideration? 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing exemption on salary earned from Hasura Inc. and capital gains from the sale of shares of Hasura Inc. on the basis that such income was not taxable in India as per the DTAA when he did not meet with the criteria of substantial presence test for the calendar year and that he stayed in US around 70 days in the year under consideration and as per the section 6(1)(a) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961 any person will be considered as resident if he/she stays more than 182 days in India? 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. 5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored?” 4. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) reveals that he noted the Assessing Officer to have conducted fair and complete enquiry and accepting the explanation of the assessee on the issue raised made no variation to the income of the assessee. The error lay only in the computation sheet which was attached with the assessment order and noting that the contradiction in the computation sheet could not override the main findings of the assessment,he therefore, held that the addition made to the income of the assessee in the computation sheet alone was not sustainable and accordingly, he allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1887/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Tanmai Raj Gopal Asst.Year –2022-23 - 3 - findings of the Ld. CIT(A) in this regard are contend at Page 19 and 20 of his order: “The assessee relied on case law to support the proposition that in cases of dual residency, the tie-breaker rule under Article 4(2) of the DTAA determines the country of ultimate tax residence, and income arising to such an individual during the period he is a resident of the other country cannot be taxed in India. The legal precedents cited by the assessee are relevant and squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, particularly with reference to the exemption of foreign capital gains and salary in light of the residential tiebreaker provisions under the DTAA. In view of the above facts and legal position, it is evident that the AO’s action in the assessment proceedings was not inconsistent. The AO conducted a fair and complete inquiry, accepted the explanation, and rightly did not propose any variation. The error lies only in the computation sheet, which is inconsistent with the body of the assessment order. Such contradiction cannot override the main findings of the assessment and therefore cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The inclusion of exempt capital gains of 9,25,60,844 in the computation sheet is directed to be deleted. The refund of 2,79,77,705 as claimed in the return is to be granted. Interest levied under section 234D, if arising from the incorrect computation, shall be withdrawn. The AO is directed to issue a revised computation sheet in line with the findings recorded in the assessment order. 10. In the result, the appellant’s appeal is Allowed.” 5. On going through the order of the Assessing Officer we find that he has noted at Page 5 of his order that from the explanation offered by the assessee it was verified by him that the taxable income has been disclosed correctly in his ITR and refund claim was justified. The explanation offered and supporting documents provided by the assessee were thoroughly verified by him and found to be in order and noting so he accepted the returned income filed by the assessee. The findings of the Assessing Officer in this regard are contend at Page 5 and 6 of his order: “From the explanation offered by the assessee, it was verified that the taxable income has been disclosed correctly in his ITR and refund claimed was justified. The explanations offered and supporting documents provided by the assessee were thoroughly verified and found to be in order. Consequently, no adjustments are necessary for the assessment year. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1887/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Tanmai Raj Gopal Asst.Year –2022-23 - 4 - 4. Table of variations: In light of the above facts and on the basis of material available on record, the assessment is to be completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act as under: Sl. No. Description Amount (in INR) 1 Income as per Return of Income filed 63,15,720/- 2 Income as computed u/s 143(1)(a) 3 Variations in respect of issue < > (if any) Nil 4 Total Income/Loss determined as per the above proposal 63,15,720 6. As is evident from the facts on record before us, the Assessing Officer had accepted the income returned by the assessee finding it true and correct after all verification. It was only in the computation sheet that variation was made to the income of the assessee which pertained to capital gains of Rs. 9,25,60,844/- claimed by the assessee to be exempt. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that the above facts and therefore directed deletion of the adjustment made in the computation sheet. Even otherwise, we have noted the assessee to have explained to the AO for treating the capital gains of Rs.9.25 crs not taxable, which explanation was found justified by the AO. 7. Ld. DR was unable to controvert the facts on record in the assessment order where no variation was done by the Assessing Officer and the facts in this regard as noted by the Ld. CIT(A) also. 8. In view of the above we see no reason to disagree with the Ld. CIT(A). The Assessing Officer having made no variation in the income returned by the assessee after accepting the explanation furnished by the assessee and finding it to be correct, the Ld. CIT(A) we hold has rightly Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1887/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Tanmai Raj Gopal Asst.Year –2022-23 - 5 - directed deletion of the adjustment made to the income of the assessee in the computation sheet furnished along with the assessment order. 9. The appeal of the Revenue therefore is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 26/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 26/02/2026 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 24.02.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 25.02.2026 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .02.2026 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 26.02.2026 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 26.02.2026 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 26.02.2026 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "