NATARAJAN PURUSHOTHAMAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO. INTERNATIONAL TAX WARD-2(1), CHENNAI

2 - 2. The assessee is stated to be non-resident Indian employed in Dubai since 2011. The assessee and his wife live in Dubai and visit India on regular intervals to meet his elderly parents. The assessee was assessed u/s 144 on 24.12.2019 and saddled with addition of Rs.6 Lacs u/s 69A. It transpired that the assessee made deposit of Rs.15 Lacs in Bank account which was stated to be funded out of lease rent advance and withdrawals from bank account / remittances from abroad. A reference was made to Addl. CIT (International Taxation), Range-2 seeking directions u/s 144A. As per the directions, Ld. AO was directed to consider the sum of Rs.6 Lacs as unexplained money u/s 69A.

During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that he used to bring cash during visits to India and it was customary to provide some cash to the parents during such visit. The Ld. CIT(A), inter-alia, observed that the deposits of Rs.3.45 Lacs was stated to funded out of earlier withdrawals and transfer from western union. It was possible that some cash might have been saved by the family which was later on deposited in the bank account. Considering the same, allowance of Rs.4 Lacs could be granted to the assessee and therefore, the balance addition of Rs.2 Lacs was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

Upon careful consideration, we find that the assessee is employed in Dubai and occasionally visit India to meet elderly parents. The assessee does not have any source of income in India. Therefore, the explanation that some cash was saved by the parents and it was deposited in the bank account could be considered as valid explanation of the source. This amount could 3 - not be considered as unexplained income of the assessee considering the fact that he is a non-resident. Therefore, by deleting the addition of Rs.2 Lacs, we allow the appeal.

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order.