SATISH NARAYAN TARALE,BELGAVI vs. INTL.TAXATION WARD, PANAJI

ITA 55/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 July 2025AY 2019-20Bench: the Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bengaluru ['Ld. DRP']. The Ld. DRP vide its direction dt. 23/12/2024 accepted the assessee's substantial explanation vis-à- vis submission and restricted the additions only to ₹1,50,000/- against which assessee tendered inconsistent explanation on two occasions.5. Pursuant to such directions the Ld. AO vide order dt. 15/01/2025 made a solitary addition ₹1,50,000/- u/s 69A as unexplained money and brought same to tax u/s 115BBE of the Act vide final assessment15 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that an individual, regardless of residential status, is entitled to the Basic Exemption Limit (BEL) of ₹2.50 Lakhs for income not taxed under Chapter XII. However, BEL is not available for income taxed under Section 115BBE. Crucially, the Tribunal ruled that if an individual's total income, even after additions, does not exceed BEL, they are not obligated to file a return, and thus, reopening under Section 148/149 is invalid. Consequently, the impugned addition under Chapter XII was vacated, and the AO was directed to refund the excess appeal fees.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident individual, did not file an income return. Information regarding foreign currency transactions led to the reopening of assessment under Section 148. The AO made an addition of ₹50,35,902 for unexplained money under Section 69A, which the DRP restricted to ₹1,50,000, bringing it to tax under Section 115BBE. The total assessed income of ₹1,56,040 resulted in a tax liability of ₹90,000, as the AO denied the benefit of the Basic Exemption Limit (BEL).

What were the issues?

Whether a non-resident individual assessee is eligible for the Basic Exemption Limit (BEL) when computing tax liability, and if income up to BEL should be excluded for income taxable under Section 115BBE. Also, the validity of assessment reopening under Sections 148/149 when the total income does not exceed BEL.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144C(13),Section 6(6),Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 149,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 4,Section 3,Section 14,Section 253(6),Section 252(6),Section 161(1A),Section 164,Section 164A,Section 167B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]
Pronounced: 24/07/2025

PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; The captioned appeal is filed by the assessee challenges DIN & Order No ITBA/AST/F/144/2024- 25/1072202908(1) dt. 15/01/2025 passed by the Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. AO’] u/s 144 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] anent to assessment year 2019-20 [‘AY’]. ITAT-Panaji Satish Narayan Tarale Vs ITO ITA Nos.055/PAN/2025 AY: 2019-20 The primary grievance in the present appeal 2. twirls around entitlement of basis exemption limit [‘BEL’] to a non-resid

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →