Full Text
14.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (CENTRAL -1),NEW DELHI Appellant
Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney and Mr. Sanjay Kumar,Advocates.
Through: Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Vaibhav Kulkami,Advocates.
15.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ITA Nos.280,281,282,283,284&289of2015 Page1of5
2015:DHC:11062-DB (CENTRAL -1),NEW DELffl Appellant
AND
19.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
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 subjectto alljust exceptions.
2.The applications are disposed of.
ITA Nos.280,281,282,283,284&289of2015 Page3of5
> ITA Nos.280/2015.281/2015.282/2015.283/2015.284/2015& 289/201S
ORDER
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 ofthe CIT(Appeals)as affirmed by the ITAT is that the Assessee resided in the country for less than 182 days in each ofthe 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 Nanda352ITR 611(Del).
7. Consequently,these appeals are dismissed in terms ofthe aforementioned ITA Nos.280,281,282,283,284&289of2015 Page4of[5] decision. JULY 06,2015/dn S.MURALIDHAR,J VIBHU BAKHRU,J ITA Nos.280,281,282,283,284&289of2015 Page5of[5]