TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 886
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fact that the assessee did not produce details/ documents before AO without any reasonable cause and despite being given sufficient opportunities?" (b) "Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in accepting additional evidence is not correct as per judgment of the Delhi High Court in case of M/s. Manish Build Well (P) Ltd. (204Taxmann 106(Delhi) 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that addition u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 cannot be made in this case, because the AO has not made addition u/s. 68, but has made the addition as an unexplained investment which is subject matter of section 69 of the I.T.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....37 Crores, the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that there is an escapement of Income and accordingly the case of the assessee was reopened U/s. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly the Assessing Officer issued notices to the assessee. After several notices the Assessing Officer noted the assessee's response as under :- On 28.12.2016, assessee replied to notice U/s. 142(1) and 143(2) of the l.T. Act, that all the investments and purchases during the period are purely and only out of my own funds send through normal banking channels. All the transactions are done at Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank and payments are against those purchases to my brokers Ventura Securities Ltd., "I herewith attach my RBI permission for the same Ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with no other option but to make an addition of Rs. 25.37 Crores to the income of the assessee, as Unexplained Investments made by the assessee under the head Income from Other Sources. Penalty proceedings U/s. 271(l)(c) of the IT, Act, are initiated separately for concealment of Income." 6. Against the above order the assessee is in appeal before learned CIT(A). 7. Before learned CIT(A) assessee submitted additional evidence. Learned CIT(A) obstained remand report from the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer objected to the additional evidence on the ground that despite reasonable opportunity the assessee has not submitted the same. However, learned CIT(A) noted that there was genuine reason for not submitting the evidence befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue to be decided is whether unexplained, income (under section 68 Income Tax Act 1961 since Assessing Officer treated income as cash credit) can be assessed in India or UAE. Since appellant is resident of UAE, Article 22 comes to fore. The clause is as under: ARTICLE 22 OTHER INCOME 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph (2), items of income of a resident of a Contracting State, wherever arising, which are not expressly dealt with in the foregoing articles of this Agreement, shall be taxable only in that Contracting State. 2. The provisions of paragraph (1) shall not apply to income, other than income from immovable property as defined in paragraph (2) of Article 6, if the recipient of such income, being a resident o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tional evidence by learned CIT(A). We note that learned CIT(A) has given due reasoning as to why there was delay in evidence in as much as assessee was NRI and there was some issues regarding service of notices to the assessee. Moreover, after admission of additional evidence the same has been forwarded to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer on merits of the same has also commented upon. Hence, in our considered opinion this ground raised in this regard by the Revenue has no merit. As regards merits of the issue learned CIT(A) has duly noted that the assessee has business in Dubai. It is undisputed that the assessee is NRI. The impugned sums have been transferred from his Dubai account to account in India. In these circumstances th....