TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 908
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....1521/MDs/2015 for assessment year 2010-2011. 2. Facts of the case are as follows: The assessee was employed in Google India Private Limited. The assessee's gross taxable income for the assessment year 2010-11 was Rs. 76,70,698/- comprising of Rs. 76,17,979/- under the head salary and Rs. 52,323/- under perks and other amenities, and other income of Rs. 396/-(resulting in a Returned Income of Rs. 75,70,698/-) as stated in the assessee's Income-tax Return. In addition, because of the NOR (Not Ordinarily Resident) status of the assessee, for the said Assessment Year (as defined in Section 6(6) (a) of Income-tax Act), there was also an exempt income of Rs. 1,19,49,709/- being the income arising outside India as stated in Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id refund claim, and subsequently, on 5-5-2011, after not hearing back from the Assessing Officer, the assessee suo motu sent detailed documents more clearly explaining the rationale behind the refund claim and proving his eligibility for the refund of income tax. 4. It was contended that the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11 filed by the assessee on 30-7-2011 declaring a taxable income of Rs. 75,70,698/- was processed under section 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961, on 15-3-2012 determining the total income at Rs. 1,95,20,410/- by ignoring/disallowing the exempt income of Rs. 1,19,49,709/- claimed by the assessee viz., income arising outside India for a NOR (Not Ordinarily Resident) assessee as per Section 5(1)(c) and Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tock options issued by the Holding Company in USA is sufficient to hold that it is taxable under the head 'salary' as 'perquisites' with reference to the provisions under section 5(1) (c) and 6(6) (a) read with Section 17?; (iii) Whether such tax can be imposed by the Revenue under section 143(1) of the Act after issuance of Notice under section 143(2) of the Act?. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee submitted that the Appellate Tribunal failed to appreciate the documents submitted by the assessee, in order to prove the tax exemption on income derived from selling stock options. Further the learned counsel made reliance on the document in page No. 19 of the typed set of papers. 9. On a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me were sold through a US-based company and the cash proceedings were directly sent to his old account in the USA bank. 12. Based upon these facts, the counsel for the appellant submitted that as per Section 5(1) of the Income-tax Act, the assessee comes under the category of NOR assessee and is liable to pay tax only on income earned in India. Specifically, Section 5(1) excludes "income which accrues or arises outside India" in the case of Not Ordinarily Resident assessee. 13. From the reading of the above, it is clear that the assessee has to be a "non-resident". The word "non-resident" is defined in Section 115C(e) of the Act. It means an individual, being a citizen of India or a person of Indian Origin who is not a "resident". As ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said letter has also been enclosed in the typed set of papers at page No. 13. The department also sought particulars from the assessee about his NOR status, but instead of appearing before the Commissioner in person, the assessee gave a reply along with particulars of his stay in India from the year 2003 to 2009. The said letter also forms part of the documents and is found at page No. 19 of the typed set of papers. However, the department was not satisfied with the reply submitted by the assessee. 16. After various communication between the assessee and the department, though the Commissioner concluded that the exemption claimed by the assessee which was in the form of sale of stock options in the USA, however, Form-16 annexed to the ....