9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 76 - AT - Income TaxAssessment of income - whether CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.2,70,000/- as income from other sources instead of exempt agricultural income - Held that - Considering the material available on record claim of the assessee regarding cultivation of 180 bigha of land was accepted by the CIT(A) who has taken an amount of Rs.3500/- per bigha as net income from agricultural operations. He has taken Rs.6500/- to Rs.7000/- per bigha as gross amount of sugar cane value which on the basis of 50 qtl. yield per bigha gives a rate of Rs.130/- per qtl. of sugar cane which the AR has claimed and which the CIT(A) has also considered. CIT(A) only deducted the amount of agricultural expenses which he estimated at 50% of gross receipts which is justified. AR has not commented anything about expenses, he only insisted that that rate of sugar cane should have been taken @ Rs.130/- per qtl. which was taken by CIT(A) and after reducing expenses, he arrived at Rs.3500/- being net income per bigha. Therefore, no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) - appeal filed by the assessee dismissed
Issues:
1. Assessment of agricultural income vs. income from other sources. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.2,70,000 as income from other sources instead of exempt agricultural income. The assessee declared agricultural income of Rs.9 lakhs from 180 bigha of land, with 100 bigha in the assessee's name and 80 bigha in the name of his mother. The Assessing Officer accepted agricultural income of Rs.3 lakhs based on a rate of Rs.3000 per bigha. The Ld CIT(A) partly deleted the addition, stating that the Assessing Officer erred in not considering the land owned by the appellant's mother for computation of agricultural income. The Ld CIT(A) estimated the net income per bigha at Rs.3500, resulting in a total agricultural income of Rs.6,30,000. The balance amount of Rs.2,70,000 was treated as income from other sources. The appeal was then filed before the tribunal. The tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and upheld the Ld CIT(A)'s decision. It acknowledged the acceptance of cultivation of 180 bigha of land by the assessee and the estimation of net income per bigha at Rs.3500 by the Ld CIT(A). The tribunal noted that the Ld CIT(A) had already considered the rate of sugar cane at Rs.130 per quintal, after deducting estimated expenses. The tribunal found no fault in the Ld CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision regarding the treatment of income from agricultural sources and other sources. In conclusion, the tribunal upheld the Ld CIT(A)'s decision regarding the computation of agricultural income and income from other sources. The tribunal found the Ld CIT(A)'s estimation of net income per bigha and consideration of expenses to be justified, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the assessee.
|
