TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 377
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee along with Form No. 36 which, for A.Y. 2012-13, is stating as under: We are writing to you to request the condonation of delay in filing an application to the Appellate Tribunal against the appellate order dated 14-02- 2017. Due to circumstances beyond our control, there has been a delay in submitting the application for appeal. Brief facts of the case: 1.1 The assessee earning income by way of salary from a foreign shipping company. As per Section 6(6) the residential status of assessee is NRI in Assessment year 2012-13. The income earned by the ways of salary is accrued and received to taxpayer outside India. 1.2 But unfortunately, an order u/s 144 was passed on 20.03.2015, wherein the Learned AO has taken view that amount transmitted by employer and credited in NRE account of assessee in India is income received in India as per Section-5(2)(a) and accordingly income was charged to tax and demanding tax of Rs. 20,81,665/-. 1.3 Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal on 26.04.2016 with the CIT (A). 1.4 However, the Appellate Order was issued by y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITAT as the sole recourse to mitigate the demand and rectify the aforementioned order. While we acknowledge a significant delay in approaching the ITAT, we assure you that the delay was not intentional and was caused by genuine reasons beyond our control. We also understand the importance of adhering to timelines set by the Tribunal and regret any inconvenience caused by the delay. We humbly request your kind consideration in condoning the delay and allowing the submission of the application for appeal. We assure you of full cooperation and compliance with all necessary procedures going forward." 1.2. During the course of the hearing, the assessee has also filed an affidavit, the contents of which are as under: In the matter of Pritpal Singh Basan, PAN: ACZPB3606L, Asst Year 2012- 13 We, Sumanta Saha & Kirti Kapoor, the Authorised Representatives of the assessee, Pritpal Singh Basan, hereby solemnly affirm & declare as under: 1. That the assessee received the order u/s 250 of the Income tax Act on 14.02.2017; 2. That the appeal was to be filed by 14.04.2017; 3. That despite a series of communication and corresponden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the law as laid down in the case of CIT Versus Ogale Glass Works Limited [1954] 25 ITR 529. 4. For that applying the law laid down in the case of Ogale Glass (supra.) learned AO may be directed to delete the addition on account of salary remitted and then credited in NRE Bank account in India amounting to Rs. 4078283/-. 5. For that despite several submissions and rectification petitions filed on various dates with the CIT (A) by the assessee/AR based on the CBDT Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017 along with the corrigendum to Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017, the learned CIT (A) has not revised the order/rejected the petition. 6. For that during pendency of the appeal recovery of disputed demand may be stayed. 7. For that honorable Tribunal may allow the cost of appeal in favour of the assessee. 8. For that appellant seeks kind permission to raise new contentions and grounds of appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee as per the statement of facts are that the assessee is a marine engineer and remained for most of time out of India and totally relied on persons looking after filing of return of income and representa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een decided, therefore, the assessee has filed the appeal belatedly. 6. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made and the record have been examined. The Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeal had issued directions to the Ld. AO to verify the claim of the assessee that the total salary income of Rs.44,60,630 was received, instead of the income returned at Rs.47,76,015 and the same could be verified for Rs.40,78,283 only and the Ld. AO was directed to reconcile the same after providing an opportunity to the appellant while giving effect to the appellate order. As regards the taxability of the income, the Ld. CIT(A) relied upon the decisions in the case of Tapas Kumar Bandopadhyay Vs DDIT (Int. Tax)-3(1), Kolkata in ITA No. 70/Kol/2016 dated 01.06.2016 by the "C" Bench, Kolkata and Tapan Kumar Patanaik Vs DDIT(IT)-3(1), Kolkata in ITA No. 68/Kol/2016 dated 10.06.2016 and upheld the action of the Ld. AO. However, a perusal of the Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017, which is clarificatory in nature, shows that the salary accrued to a non-resident seafarer for services rendered outside India on a foreign ship shall not be included in the total income merely because the sa....