|The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 0947 (Del-Trib)
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Where assessee got migrated from Pakistan and brought cash of Rs. 50 lakhs and gold, out of which cash of Rs. 20.90 lakhs and Rs. 27.50 lakhs was deposited in India into bank account then assessee was required to prove that they had sufficient funds/wealth in those countries and that the transfer of the cash/jewellery to India can directly be linked with the said funds or wealth and if so done there no addition can be made.
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 68 - Assessee migrated from Pakistan and brought cash and gold -
Assessee stated that he had migrated from Pakistan to India on 17-3-2013 to permanently settle and brought cash of Rs. 50 lakhs and gold, out of which cash of Rs. 20.90 lakhs and Rs. 27.50 lakhs was deposited in India into bank account No. 7152 of ICICI Bank and account No. 2145 of United Bank of India respectively and filed intimation/declaration to the Income Tax Department as per CBDT Circular No. 73A/2169 â€“ I (A â€“ 11), dated 20-2-1969. AO asked assessee to prove genuineness of the facts regarding details regarding the type of currency in which cash of Rs. 50 lakhs was brought into India, the details of checkpoints where cash of Rs. 50 lakhs was checked during immigration in the year 2013 and details of the person from whom the aforesaid currency was exchanged to the Indian currency. Assessee did not reply but sought adjournment. AO taxed amount concerned under section 68. Held: It is undoubtedly an established fact that Hindus in Pakistan are a persecuted minority. Even Revenue does not deny the fact. Therefore, it may be possible that assessee might have brought this sum from Pakistan through unofficial channels. However, that could not go against the assessee because it was claimed by assessee that there was no official channel available for transfer of funds from Pakistan to India. As before AO assessee could not submit all the requisite details, assessee submitted details according to his understanding before CIT(A), but without any enquiry, evidence produced by assessee were rejected. Assessee was not an Indian resident but had come from Pakistan as persecuted Hindu community, therefore naturally assessee could not have the sufficient or foolproof evidences. This fact had also been considered in CBDT Notification No. 5, dated 29-5-1969 wherein, it is provided that any claim by such migrants that funds or the jewellery was brought from the concerned countries, would be accepted only if the persons concerned produce adequate evidence to show that they had sufficient funds/wealth in those countries and that the transfer of the cash/jewellery to India can directly be linked with the said funds or wealth. Even it was also the request of assessee that AO had not considered evidence placed before him in view of the above circular, therefore, matter should go back to AO. Revenue did not contest above claim of the assessee. Accordingly, issue was set aside to AO with direction to examine the evidence produced by assessee and test them in accordance with Notification No. 5, dated 29-5-1969 as stated above.
FAVOUR : Matter remanded.
A.Y. : 2014-15
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT