Why has India reopened a tax year I thought was closed?
Because a reassessment notice does exactly that: it reopens a year that was closed. For non-residents the reopening is frequently driven by data rather than by anything you filed — property transactions and remittances reported to the department by banks and registrars, which arrive as figures with no context attached. Something in that data did not match the return, or there was no return against it at all. The useful first question is therefore not what you owe but what the department thinks it has found. Under s.148 the procedure requires the department to share the information relied on and to consider your reply before proceeding, so ask for the material and answer that.
Can I challenge the reopening itself instead of arguing the tax?
That is usually where the first response goes. A reassessment reopens a closed year, and the initial answer is not on the merits but on whether the reopening is valid — whether the information relied on has been shared with you and whether your reply on that point has been considered before the department proceeds. Arguing the tax first concedes the more useful ground. It also wastes work, because a merits reply built before you have seen the department's material is a reply to a case you are guessing at. In practice both lines are prepared, but they are filed in that order, and the validity point is put squarely rather than mentioned in passing.
Am I allowed to see what information the department is relying on?
The procedure requires the department to share the information relied on and to consider your reply on it before proceeding, so yes, and asking for it is part of the answer rather than a delay to it. It matters more than it sounds. Non-resident reopenings usually rest on a reported transaction, and the report may be of a gross figure, a duplicated entry, or a transaction you were only one party to. You cannot explain a figure you have not seen. Once the material is in front of you the reply can address the specific entry with the documents behind it, rather than defending the year in general terms.
India reopened my year over a property sale, what do they want?
Almost always the trail. The department has a reported consideration and no account of how it arose, so the reply has to supply the chain: how the property came to you and at what cost, what was actually received and when, what was withheld or deposited at the time, and where the proceeds went. Each link needs its own document, and the documents are filed together in the order the entries appear. A reply that states a net position without the underlying deed, cost record and withholding evidence leaves the reported figure standing as the only proved number on the file.
Do I still have to answer if I was a non-resident that year?
Yes, and being a non-resident changes what you file rather than whether you file. Non-residency is a conclusion that has to be evidenced in the reply — the travel record behind the day count, the overseas employment or business record, the treaty entitlement where you rely on one. Silence reads as agreement with the department's data. It is also worth separating two things in the reply: whether the year was properly reopened at all, and whether the income in the reported data was taxable in India given your status. Both belong in the response, and they are not the same argument.
Should I file the return the reassessment notice asks for?
That is a decision to take deliberately, not reflexively, and it is taken after you have seen the information relied on. Filing puts a computation on the record and can be the right move where the income is real and the trail supports your figures. It is a different choice where the reopening itself is questionable, or where the reported data turns out to describe a transaction that was not yours or was counted twice. The sequence we work to is: obtain the material, answer on the validity of the reopening, then file or reply on the merits with the transaction trail attached.
What is TCS on foreign remittance?
Tax collected at source. When a resident individual remits money abroad under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme — or buys an overseas tour package — the bank or seller collects an amount of tax on top and deposits it against your PAN. It is not a cost and it is not a final tax: it appears in your annual tax statement and is set off against the tax on your return, with the excess refunded. The rates and the purposes they attach to have been amended repeatedly, so we confirm them for the remittance year. See LRS limits and TCS.
Can an NRI claim back TDS deducted on Indian income?
Yes, by filing an Indian return for the year. Withholding on rent, interest, dividends, professional fees or a property sale is an advance payment, not a final tax, so where the actual liability is lower — because of the treaty, because of the basic exemption, or because the deduction was computed on gross proceeds rather than gain — the excess comes back as a refund. It needs your PAN, a validated Indian bank account and the deductor's statement filed. See Indian filing and credit claims.
