JOHNSON PRAVEEN QUADROS,AUSTRALIA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTL TAX WARD 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5778/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Johnson Praveen Quadros, a non-resident Indian, who appealed against the final assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18, which added Rs. 14,70,000 to his income as unexplained investment under section 69 read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was based on the assumption that the funds used for purchasing immovable property were unexplained. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) upheld the addition, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal examined the evidence and explanations provided by the assessee, including the source of funds transferred to his mother's account and subsequently used for the property purchase. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had sufficiently demonstrated the legitimacy of the funds, leading to the deletion of the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837383 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Unexplained investment
• Section: 148; 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5778/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Johnson Praveen Quadros Australia C/0 E 602, NAZRENE APPTS MARVE ROAD, KHARODI MALAD WEST MUMBAI 400095 Maharashtra (PAN: AACPQ0820G) Vs. Income Tax Officer, INTL Tax Ward 3 (3)(1) Room No.626, 6th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, G Block, BKC, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Anoop Kumar Agarwal, CA Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 17.02.2026 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee is against the final assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 28.08.2025, pursuant to the direction issued by the ld. Dispute Resolution Panel – 1, Mumbai vide order dated 28.07.2025 vide order no. ITBA/DRP/F/144C(5)/2025-26/1078981626(1) dated 28.07.2025 u/s. 144C(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), for AY 2017-18. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.5778/MUM/2025 Johnson Praveen Quadros, AY 2017-18 1.0 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Dispute Resolution Panel, Mumbai has grossly erred in dismissing the appellant's objections on mere presumptions and without thoroughly examining the facts and evidence presented, and confirming the proposed variations in the draft assessment order with addition of Rs. 14,70,000/- to the income of the appellant u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.0 The appellant craves this Hon'ble Tribunal to provide stay of recovery of demand till the conclusion of this appeal. 3.0 The appellant craves leave to add or alter any ground of appeal at any time up to the final decision of the appeal, and to educe additional evidence, if so required while prosecuting the appeal. 3. The only issue involved in the present appeal is in respect of addition of Rs.14,70,000/- u/s 69 of the Act as unexplained investment. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a non-resident Indian (NRI) in the year under consideration. Return of income was not filed for the year. Based on the information available regarding purchase of immovable property by the assessee amounting to Rs.32 lakhs, proceedings u/s 148 were initiated. It was gathered that assessee had purchased an immovable property for consideration of Rs.32 lakhs in respect of which details of payments with supporting documents and evidence were called for. 3.1. Assessee explained before the ld. AO that since 2011 when he became NRI, had been regularly transferring money to his blood relatives in India out of his earnings overseas. This accumulation was invested through his relatives for purchasing the immovable property in India. Assessee had made part payment directly through his bank account also. Date wise description of payments made towards investment in the immovable property both, directly by the assessee and through his mother is tabulated below. For the investment through the mother of the assessee, trail of funds amounting to Rs.14.70 lakhs is also explained which was sourced by the assessee Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.5778/MUM/2025 Johnson Praveen Quadros, AY 2017-18 from his overseas earnings. Assessee has placed on record corroborative documentary evidence to explain the trail of funds invested through his mother as under: 4. Ld. AO had no doubt on the investment component directly made by the assessee. What is under contest is the amount of Rs. 14.70 lakhs which has been made through the account of mother of the assessee. This trail of funds into the account of mother of assessee is backed by corroborative documentary evidence and adequately explained before us by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee. Assessee has Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.5778/MUM/2025 Johnson Praveen Quadros, AY 2017-18 also established the relationship of mother through whose account part of these payments were made by placing copy of his passport. Assessee has also demonstrated that the initial money transferred to his mother were invested by her in term deposits with bank which over a period got matured and were then utilized for making investment in the immovable property under consideration. 5. We have perused the documents placed on record and also given thought to the considerations to the submissions made. The above stated factual position remains uncontroverted as nothing contrary has been brought on record. Assessee has adequately explained the source of payments made for the purchase of immovable property, part of which was added as unexplained investment. Accordingly, the addition so made of Rs. 14.70 lakhs u/s 69 by the ld. AO is deleted. Grounds raised by the assessee in this respect are allowed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 17 February, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated:17 February, 2026 Ankit, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4. 5. Guard File CIT BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "