1983 (10) TMI 23 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Revision of income tax assessment by the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax for the year 1970-71.
2. Disallowance of deduction for the value of standing crops at the beginning of the year in the assessment.
3. Application of Section 19A of the Agricultural Income-tax Act.
4. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner to revise the order of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was filed by an assessee against the Commissioner's order revising the income tax assessment for the year 1970-71. The Commissioner, using his suo motu power under Section 34 of the Act, refixed the income at Rs. 2,62,532.71, differing from the initial assessment of Rs. 86,242.71 by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer. The dispute arose due to a change in the basis of assessment by the assessee for that specific year.

2. The Commissioner disallowed the deduction of the value of standing crops at the beginning of the year, which was previously allowed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer. The assessee argued against this disallowance, claiming it would lead to double assessment. The Commissioner's decision was based on the assessee's change in assessment basis for the year 1970-71, deviating from the compounding basis used for the previous year.

3. Section 19A of the Act was discussed, which allows reassessment if the value of closing stock of agricultural produce for the previous year was not considered in the total agricultural income calculation. However, in this case, the application of Section 19A was deemed irrelevant as the revision pertained to the assessment year 1970-71, not the previous year covered by the permission to compound.

4. The jurisdictional issue was raised regarding the timing of the Commissioner's revision order. The contention that the Commissioner exceeded the three-year limitation period for revising the order of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer was dismissed, as the revision fell within the permissible timeframe. Thus, the court upheld the Commissioner's order, dismissing the appeal without costs.