2025 (9) TMI 1230 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee granted exemption under section 10(26AAA) after proving settler status; income treated nil and tax addition set aside

Ajay Kumar Agarwal Versus ITO, Ward-3 (1), Gangtok

ITAT Kolkata allowed the appeal, holding the assessee entitled to exemption under section 10(26AAA) after proof of Sikkim settler status via residential ... Denial of Benefit of exemption u/s 10(26AAA) - Assessee as submits that the assessee is a Sikkim old settler to be assessed as Sikkimese as because he is engaged in the activities earning his income from the State of Sikkim - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the assessee is an individual and he has stated that after claiming exemption u/s 10(26)AAA of the Act, his income was nil. The assessee being a settler of Sikkim has clearly been proved by the residential certificate by the assessee and further claiming of exemption u/s 10(26AAA) of the Act has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court decision. Keeping in view, the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment as well as facts of the case, we are in this view that the assessee is entitled to take the benefit of exemption u/s 10(26AAA) of the Act. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO is hereby set aside. Assessee appeal allowed. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED 1. Whether the assessee, claiming to be a Sikkim Old Settler/domiciled in Sikkim up to 26 April 1975, is entitled to exemption under section 10(26)AAA of the Income Tax Act in light of the Apex Court's exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, effective from 1 April 2022. 2. Whether the assessing officer was justified in treating cash bank deposits as unexplained cash credit and in making an estimated addition of 8% of other bank credits to income where the assessee claimed nil taxable income by relying on the exemption under section 10(26)AAA. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1 - Entitlement to exemption under section 10(26)AAA for Sikkim Old Settlers Legal framework: Section 10(26)AAA provides exemption for income of certain persons identified as Sikkim subjects/settlers; the Explanation to that provision and its scope determine who qualifies. The Apex Court exercised Article 142 to direct that, until legislative amendment, all individuals domiciled in Sikkim up to 26 April 1975 shall be entitled to the exemption with effect from 1 April 2022, to avoid discriminatory outcomes. Precedent Treatment: The Tribunal relied on the recent Apex Court judgment (summarized in the record) which, in exercise of Article 142, directed application of the exemption to individuals domiciled in Sikkim up to the appointed date from 1 April 2022 onward. A co-ordinate Bench decision (remanding facts to AO to determine Sikkimese status and taxable income for a petrol pump assessee) was considered and distinguished on facts. Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal found no dispute on primary fact of domicile/status: the assessee produced a residential certificate from the District Collector demonstrating status as a Sikkim Old Settler. Given that factual showing and the Apex Court's direction under Article 142 (to extend the exemption to individuals domiciled in Sikkim up to 26 April 1975 from 1 April 2022), the Tribunal held that the assessee falls within the category entitled to exemption under section 10(26)AAA. The Tribunal observed that the co-ordinate Bench remand related to a different factual matrix where taxable income was in question (petrol pump operations with cash flows), whereas in the present case the assessee claimed nil taxable income after applying the exemption and furnished the domicile evidence; thus the earlier remand did not preclude granting the exemption here. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - Where an assessee proves status as a Sikkim Old Settler by credible official documentary evidence (residential certificate from District Collector) and a binding Apex Court direction applies the exemption to such domiciled persons from 1 April 2022 onward, the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 10(26)AAA as directed. Obiter - observations about the co-ordinate Bench's procedural remand in petrol pump cases are contextual and not binding on the present factual conclusion. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the exemption under section 10(26)AAA to the assessee, set aside the addition, and held that the assessee was entitled to claim nil taxable income for the relevant year subject to the exemption as per the Apex Court direction. Issue 2 - Validity of additions treating bank deposits as unexplained cash credits and making an 8% estimated profit addition Legal framework: Additions under the Income Tax Act for unexplained cash credits (section 68 and related provisions) require the assessee to discharge the onus of explaining the nature and source of amounts credited in bank accounts. Estimation of profit (8% in this case) on other bank credits may be applied only after the primary determination of taxable income and relevance of exemptions. Precedent Treatment: The Tribunal referred to the co-ordinate Bench's determination that where exemption under section 10(26)AAA applies, assessment authorities must first determine status and whether income arises from sources in Sikkim before treating bank deposits as assessee's income; co-ordinate authority remanded factual determination rather than endorsing mechanical addition of full bank deposits. Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal held that the additions were interlinked with the question of entitlement to exemption. Since the assessee established Sikkimese status and was entitled to the statutory exemption under section 10(26)AAA (as applied by the Apex Court), the preliminary basis for treating the bank deposits as taxable unexplained income was vitiated. The Tribunal further noted that where an exemption excludes an individual from tax on particular incomes, taxability must be examined in light of that exclusion before making additions; in similar fact patterns the AO must determine actual taxable income (e.g., amounts that represent business inflows payable to suppliers) rather than mechanically adding total cash deposits. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside both the unexplained cash credit addition and the 8% estimated profit addition as they were dependent on the rejected premise that the deposits were taxable in the hands of the assessee notwithstanding the exemption claim. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - Where entitlement to a statutory exemption has been established, an assessing officer cannot sustain additions treating deposits as unexplained taxable income without first determining whether the exempt character removes taxability; mechanical additions premised on unexplained deposits are not justified when exemption applies. Obiter - remarks on the precise methodology AO should adopt for tracing outflows (e.g., payments to oil companies) are procedural guidance based on co-ordinate decisions but not essential to the holding. Conclusion: The Tribunal set aside the addition of the bank deposits as unexplained cash credit and the 8% estimated profit addition, finding them inextricably linked to and overridden by the assessee's established entitlement to exemption under section 10(26)AAA. Cross-reference The conclusion on Issue 1 (entitlement to exemption under section 10(26)AAA) is dispositive of Issue 2 (validity of additions), as the additions were made on the premise that the income was taxable; once the exemption is applied in accordance with the Apex Court's Article 142 direction and the assessee's proved Sikkimese status, the basis for the additions collapses.