GAUTAM PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), IT,, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1431/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 June 2026AY 2017-201816 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the discrepancy in names was clarified by an affidavit, and the clerical error in the bank balance was substantiated with bank statements. Consequently, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer added ₹6,05,56,300 to the assessee's income as unexplained money from foreign bank accounts. The assessee claimed a clerical error in reporting the balance of one account and that the income was earned abroad and not taxable in India.

What were the issues?

Whether foreign bank account balances, with a claimed clerical error in reporting and earned abroad, are taxable in India. Whether name discrepancies are material to the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 1431/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 Gautam Prasad ACIT, Circle-2(1), IT, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AJLPP8964C Appearances: Assessee represented by : Miraj D Shah, AR. Department represented by : Subhendu Datta, CIT-DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 14.05.2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 11.06.2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 22, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)' passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 17.06.2025. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the submission filed before the Ld. CIT(A). The order is in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the same be quashed and or set aside. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant, being a Non- Resident, maintained foreign bank accounts in Sweden from income earned in Sweden. Such income does not accrue nor arise in India and hence not taxable in India. Hence, the addition of Rs.6,05,56,300 u/s 69A of the Act was not justified and was factually and legally incorrect and hence the same be deleted.

“In the memorandum of appeal the assessee has raised the following Grounds of Appeal: - 1. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment order passed was in violation of principles of natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. 2. For that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction over the case of the assessee hence the notice issued by him and the assessment order dated 22/11/2019 passed by him was bad in law and thus the notice and the assessment order be quashed. 3. For that the Assessing Officer failed to appreciate the evidences filed before him and thus the additions were made merely on conjecture and without any proper material or basis. Thus the addition was un justified and uncalled for and the same be deleted. 4. For that the assessee being a Swedish national and Non Resident for Tax Purposes in India the Income earned and accrued outside Indian could not be assessed to tax in India and hence all such additions be deleted. 5. For that the deposits in foreign bank accounts were earned and accrued outside India over several years and hence no amount in such accounts could be assessed to tax in India and hence all such additions be deleted. 6. For that the addition of Rs,6,05,56,300 was not justified and was factually and legally incorrect and hence the same be deleted. 7. For that the error in submitting the peak balance in the return of income with respect to the Seva Ekon Omi bank due to human and clerical data

F.No. DCIT(IT),C-2(1).Kol/R_R/Gautam Prasad/2025-26/ Dated: 07.10.2025 To, The Income Tax Officer,

7.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee being an NRI, the clerical error inadvertently made in the return of income now having been clarified by the Ld. AO and the discrepancy in the names being clarified that both the names relate to the assessee, though not material for the assessment order, and the deposits in the bank accounts being out of income earned in Sweden as the bank accounts are also being maintained in Sweden, the deposits therein are not liable to be added to the total income assessed in India as the income which was received in India during the impugned assessment year had already been shown in the return of income and no further addition was liable to be made. The Ld. DR was fair enough to the remand report received from the Ld. AO, the clarification not be submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) or the Ld. AO has now been submitted by the Ld. AO in the course of the appeal before the Tribunal. 8. We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In view of the remand report received from the Ld. AO, we find no reason to sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the addition of ₹6,05,56,300/- is hereby deleted as the whole dispute arose on account of a clerical error in Schedule FA of the return of income filed before the Ld. AO

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →