TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 49
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dmitting additional evidences whereas conditions prescribed under R. 46A were not satisfied? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing income exclusion method of elimination of double taxation under India-USA DTAA instead of tax credit method as per the tax treaty? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in adjudicating on taxability of credits in account under other provisions of the Act in view of explanation furnished by the assessee? 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in accepting plea of the assessee without obtaining running ledgers of the accounts and examination of taxability of each c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer, observing that the assessee failed to provide any justification/explanation along with valid supporting evidences, passed the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act treating the peak balances available of Rs. 3,53,81,501/- as unexplained credit found in the accounts of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act were initiated separately. 6. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) and furnished additional evidences. The ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer who categorically stated that the additional evidences should not be admitted because the assessee was given ample opportunities to explain his case. Therefore, the assessee does not satisfy the condi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of the Assessing Officer in the remand report as well as the rejoinder of the ld. counsel for the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) admitted the additional evidences. 11. Regarding addition u/s 68 of the Act, we find that the ld. CIT(A) after discussing the facts of the case and observations of the Assessing Officer, came to hold as under: "4.3.5 From the details of bank statement submitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee it seen that the assessee was having balances in these accounts since 2012. The ESOP shares sold during the previous year was brought to tax during the previous year 2016- 17 relevant to the assessment year 2017-18. It is seen from the details filed by the appellant during the appellate proceedings that various....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... explained with appropriate evidences by the appellant mentioning that the rental receipts from properties in USA has been offered to taxation in USA. Therefore, it is also not the case for addition under section 69 of the IT Act. So these grounds of appeal no. 2 to 6 are accordingly allowed." 12. After perusing the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the case laws relied upon by him, we find that the CIT(A) has examined the additional evidences in the nature of foreign Bank statements and ITRs filed in USA and found that various credits in the bank accounts pertain to opening balances, sale proceeds of ESOP received in earlier years and rent received in USA. The CIT(A) examined the tax returns filed in USA and concluded the rent received in the....