Smt. Sukhmani Bedi, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2400/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5049 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S N BHATIA
• Assessee Lawyers: R S AHUJA
• Keywords: Salary income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2400/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SMT. SUKHMANI BEDI, C/O R.S. AHUJA & CO., C-353 DEFENCE COLONY, NEW DELHI. VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NEW DELHI. TAN/PAN: AHPB3816D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI R.S. AHUJA, CA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.N. BHATIA, CIT-D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 04 11 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04 11 2019 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.02.2017, PASSED BY LD. CIT (A)-24, NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S.144 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE ASSESS EE IS ONLY AGGRIEVED BY ENHANCEMENT OF INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE OF RS.9,74,199/- MADE BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON ALLEGED INC OME EARNED IN USA. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD E ARNED SALARY INCOME WHILE EMPLOYED IN USA FOR SUM OF USD 86.041 IN THE CALENDAR YEAR 2010, I.E., PERIOD FROM 01.01. 2010 TO 31.12.2010. THE ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED PRO-RATA INCOM E FOR THE I.T.A. NO.2400/DEL/2017 2 PERIOD OF NINE MONTHS IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN INDIA FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2010 TO 31.12.2010 WHICH WORKED OU T TO USD 64,473 AND WAS SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 FILED ON 11.08.2011. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT CREDIT OF TAXES AND RELIEF U/S.90/91 OF RS.5,02,508/-. LD. CIT(A) THOUGH HAS D ELETED THE SAID ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS P AID FEDERAL INCOME TAX IN USA ON SALARY INCOME WHICH IS DEDUCTI BLE FROM THE TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE ON HER WORLDWIDE INCOM E/SALARY INCOME. 3. HOWEVER, LD. CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT REFLECTED THE INCOME EARNED BY HER IN USA FOR THE P ERIOD 01.01.2011 TO 30.03.2011 FOR WHICH HE ASKED TO PROD UCE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS AS THE SAID SUM WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE HAD ST ATED THAT SHE DID NOT WORK IN USA BEYOND 31.03.2011 AND HAS N OT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME IN USA FOR THAT PERIOD AND THA T IS WHY IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 NO INCOME FROM OUTSIDE INDIA WAS REPORTED. HOWEVER, LD . CIT (A) HELD THAT ON A PRO-RATA BASIS FOR FIRST QUARTER SUM OF RS.9,74,199/- SHOULD BE ADDED ON PRO-RATA BASIS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN 01.01.2011 TO 31.03.2011. 4. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE APPROA CH OF THE LD. CIT (A) IS WHOLLY ERRONEOUS BECAUSE IT WAS CLEARLY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) THAT ASSESSEE HAD ONLY WORKED IN USA AND HAS RECEIVED SALARY ONLY FOR THE PERIOD I.T.A. NO.2400/DEL/2017 3 01.04.2010 TO 31.12.2010 AND AFTER THAT PERIOD NEIT HER SHE HAS WORKED IN USA NOR SHE HAS RECEIVED ANY SALARY I NCOME. HE ALSO SUBMITTED US INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX RETURN F OR THE YEAR 2010 OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH SHOWS THAT SHE HAD RECEIVED SALARY OF USD 86,041 FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2010 WHI CH STARTS FROM 01.04.2010 TO 31.12.2010. THE ASSESSEE HAD DUL Y SHOWED SUCH A SALARY INCOME IN A RETURN OF INCOME I N INDIA FALL WITHIN THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR, I.E., FROM 01.04.2010 TO 31.12.2010. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY SALARY AFTER 01.01.2011, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON AS TO WHY THE LD. CIT (A) SHOULD PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST H AVE EARNED INCOME FROM 01.01.2011 TO 30.03.2011 AND MAK E A PRO-RATA ENHANCEMENT OF THE INCOME. SUCH AN ENHANCE MENT OF INCOME IS COMPLETELY BASED ON CONJECTURE DE HORS ANY MATERIAL AND SAME CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. ACCORDINGLY, SUCH AN ENHANCEMENT MADE BY THE LD. CIT (A) IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH NOVEMBER, 2019. SD/- SD/- [O.P. MEENA] [AMIT SHUKLA] [ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: NOVEMBER, 2019 PKK: