TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 867
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erred to as the "Act") order dated 03.12.2024 and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019-20. 2. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. Ground No. 1 - Addition on account of alleged undisclosed salary income of Rs. 44,24,000: 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer ("AO")/Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") has erred in making an addition towards the salary income of Rs. 44,24,000 received by the appellant in his bank account with Indian Branch inasmuch as the salary income in relation to service rendered outside India is not taxable in Indian since the appellant is non-resident. 2. Ground No. 2 - Addition of account of all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ddition made on account of alleged unexplained investment by the assessee in foreign currency of Rs. 42,81,762/- and on account of money deposited in bank account, source of which remained unexplained of Rs. 1,00,34,419/-., which additions he contended were made primarily for the reason that the assessee was unable to explain its salary income. In the light of the same he contended, therefore, that the main issue to be adjudicated was the taxability of salary earned by the assessee. 4. Thereafter he proceeded to make his arguments on the issue of taxability of salary income earned by the assessee. The facts pertaining to the same are that the assessee is a non-resident in terms of the provision of Section 6 of the Act. The assessee had e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taxmann.com 238 (Karnataka) 3. Arvind Singh Chauhan V/s. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Gwalior [2014] 42 taxmann.com 285 (Agra - Trib.) 4. The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation), Ward-1(3), Bangalore V/s. Mr. Lohitakshan Nambiar ITA No. 1045/Bang/2009 (Bangalore -Trib.) More particularly our attention was drawn to the decision of the ITAT in the case of Arvind Singh Chauhan vs. Income Tax Officer 42 taxmann.com 285 (Agra - Trib.), wherein it was pointed out that the ITAT had lucidly dealt on this aspect of income accruing outside India and when it is to be treated as received in India. Our attention was drawn to Para 9 of the order as under: "9. The next objection of the Assessing Officer, which has met lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which the assessee had received pension from Malaysian Government which was remitted by the Accountant General, Federation of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur to Accountant General, Madras, for onward payment to the assessee. On these facts, rejecting the contention of the revenue that the pension amounts are required to be treated as having been received in India, Their Lorships observed, inter alia, that " that the pension payable to the assessee had accrued in Malaya........... and only thereafter, by an arrangement embodied in the letter found in Annexure D to the stated case, the pension had been remitted to the assessee in India and made available to him. The assessee had, therefore, to be regarded as having received the income outside India and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2)(a) refers to receipt of income and clarified that receipt of income refers to the first occasion when the assessee gets the money in his own control, real or constructive; that what is material is the receipt of income in its character as income and not what happens subsequently once the income in its character as such is received by the assessee or his agent. He pointed out that the ITAT noted that the assessee was in lawful right to receive this money as an employee at the place of employment and it is a matter of convenience that the money is therefore transferred to India; that these monies were at the disposal of the assessee outside India and it was in exercise of his right to dispose to the money that the money was transferred to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry, of a non resident assessee, received for employment outside India, the salary being deposited in India in the NRE account of the assessee. 10. As per the Revenue since the salary was credited to the assesses NRE account in India, therefore it was to treated as income received in India and hence taxable in India in the hands of the non resident assessee, in terms of section 5(2)(a) of the Act. 11. We agree with the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT Agra Bench in the case of Arvind Singh Chauhan (supra). As rightly pointed out by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, the ITAT in the said decision was seized with an identical issue and interpreted the term "in....