← Library
High Court of DelhiITA/281/2015

Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax. (Central-1) v. Late Shri Sudhir Sareen

2015-07-06Hon'Ble Dr. Justice S.Muralidhar,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru5 pages

$~ *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

14.

ITA 280/2015 WITH 15.

ITA 281/2015 WITH 16.

ITA 282/2015 ITA Nos. 280, 281, 282, 283,284 & 289 of 2015 By:AMULYA

(CENTRAL -1), NEW DELffl WITH 17.

ITA 283/2015 WITH 18.

ITA 284/2015 ITA Nos. 280, 281, 282, 283,284 &

AND 19.

ITA 289/2015

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

ORDER

% 06.07.2015 CM No. 7643/2015 (for exemption^ in ITA No. 280/2015 CM No. 7644/2015 (for exemption^ in ITA No. 281/2015 CM No. 7645/2015 (for exemption) in ITA No. 283/2015 CM No. 7646/2015 (for exemption^ in ITA No. 284/2015 CM No. 7750/2015 (for exemption^ in ITA No. 289/2015

1. Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2. The applications are disposed of.

ITA Nos. 280, 281, 282, 283, 284 &

> ITA Nos. 280/2015.281/2015.282/2015.283/2015.284/2015 & 289/201S

3. These appeals by the Revenue challenge the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 3120-26/Del/2011 for the Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-09.

4. There were two questions that arose before the Assessing Officer. One was regarding the addition on account of 'NRE Income' and the second was regarding addition made on account of 'unexplained credit'. Both were answered against the Revenue by the CIT (Appeals) and the ITAT for the relevant AYs. However, the only ground urged by the Revenue as far as these appeals are concerned is the addition on account of 'NRE income'.

5. Admittedly, the factual finding of the CIT (Appeals) as affirmed by the ITAT is that the Assessee resided in the country for less than 182 days in each of the relevant previous years.

6. Learned counsel on both sides agree that the case is squarely covered against the Revenue by the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Suresh Nanda 352ITR 611 (Del).

7. Consequently, these appeals are dismissed in terms of the aforementioned ITA Nos. 280, 281, 282, 283,284 &

decision.

S. MURALIDHAR, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J JULY 06,2015/dn ITA Nos. 280, 281, 282,283,284 &