NITYA GOPALAKRISHNAN,USA V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI

SA 73/DEL/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Nitya Gopalakrishnan, the applicant, who sought a stay on the recovery of an outstanding demand related to the Assessment Year 2016-17. The demand arose from additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding the source of funds used for purchasing property in India. The applicant's counsel argued that all necessary documents were provided to establish the trail of the funds remitted from the USA to India. The department's representative contested the application, asserting that the applicant failed to establish a direct nexus between the remitted funds and the property purchase. After reviewing the documents and arguments, the Tribunal decided to grant the stay on the recovery of the demand.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837608 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2026
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SINGH SHARMA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Application of stay

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण धिल्ली पीठ “डी”, धिल्ली श्री धिकास अिस्थी, न्याधयक सिस्य एिं श्री मनीष अग्रिाल, लेखाकार सिस्य क े समक्ष IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SA No. 73/Del/2026 (Arising out of IT(IT)A No. 15/Del/2026, A.Y 2016-17) Nitya Gopalakrishnan, 2 Camas Court, Pliansboro, NJ, USA 08512 PAN: BEZPG-0002-A ...... आवेदक/Applicant बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 1(3)(1), Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 ..... प्रधििािी/Respondent आवेदक/Applicant by : S/Shri Manok Sabharwal & Devvrat Tiwari, Advocates प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent by : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, SR. DR सुनिाई की धिधि/ Date of hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की धिधि/ Date of pronouncement : 20/02/2026 आिेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This application has been filed by the assessee seeking stay on recovery of outstanding demand for AY 2016-17. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the addition has been made by the Assessing Officer (AO). All relevant documents establishing trail of the amount remitted by assessee from the United States to his savings bank account in India were furnished before the authorities below. Despite that the Assessing Officer (AO) made addition. The ld. Counsel referred to the Loan Agreement at page 34 of the paper book, to show that Printed from counselvise.com 2 SA No.73/DEL/2026 the loan was taken by assessee and the loan amount was transferred to the assessee’s account with Bank of America and thereafter the same amount was remitted to the assessee’s account with Axis Bank in India. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has duly discharged his onus in establishing trail of the amount sourced, for the purchase of property in India. He, therefore, prayed for stay of recovery of the outstanding demand for A.Y. 2016-17. 3. Per contra, Shri Vikram Singh Sharma representing the department vehemently opposed the Stay Application. The ld. DR submits that the assessee was not able to establish nexus between the amount remitted from USA and the funds utilized for purchase of property in India. 4. Both sides heard. After examining the documents available on record and trail of funds shown by the assessee, prima facie we are of considered view that amount invested by the assessee in purchase of property in India was remitted from his account in US. We are of considered view that recovery of outstanding demand for impugned assessment year deserves to be stayed. The recovery of outstanding demand shall remain stayed for 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier. 5. The Registry is directed to list the appeal for hearing on 17.03.2026. Since, the date of hearing of appeal has been announced in the open court in presence of both sides, issuance of separate notice of hearing to the parties is dispensed with. 6. The assessee shall furnish paper book, if any on or before the date of hearing of appeal, with an advance copy to the opposite sides in accordance with ITAT Rules. Printed from counselvise.com 3 SA No.73/DEL/2026 7. The assessee shall not seek adjournment on the date fixed for hearing, without their being any reasonable cause. 8. In the result, Stay Application of the assessee is allowed in the terms aforesaid. Order pronounced in the open court on Friday the 20th day of February, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यायिक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER धिल्ली / Delhi, धिनांक/Dated 17/02/2026 NV/- प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपििCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलािी/The Appellant , 2. प्रधििािी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. धिभागीय प्रधिधनधि, आय.अपी.अधि., यदल्ली /DR, ITAT, धिल्ली 5. गाडड फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "