PATHIRIKATTU KALAM KUNHIRAMAN,AYYANTHOLE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THRISSUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's DR admitted the existence of NRE deposits. Considering the additional evidences filed by the assessee to prove non-resident status, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) to re-examine the issue afresh in light of these new documentary evidences.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income tax returns for multiple assessment years were reopened under Section 148. The primary dispute was the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(4)(ii) on interest earned from NRE deposits, which the Assessing Officer disallowed, contending the assessee was a resident and relying on FEMA provisions. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order, leading to the present appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee qualified as a non-resident for claiming exemption under Section 10(4)(ii) for interest on NRE deposits, and if the disallowance based on residential status and FEMA was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(1),Section 148,Section 10(4)(ii),Section 10(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav
Heard together (5 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 26.07.2024, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067071732(1) and relates to the assessment year 2017- 2018. 2. All these appeals are arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of 2 ITA No.672/Coch/2024. Pathirikattu Kalam Kunhiraman.
Income-tax
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
