2018 (3) TMI 1190 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of income from Astrology & Vastu Shastra - Held that - We find that the relief granted to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A) is based on the criteria that on the identical issue and similar facts & circumstances in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 the ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition of ₹ 10 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A), following the order of the ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2011-12, has granted relief to the assessee. Since the Department did not challenge the order of the ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2011-12 and the ld. D.R. has not brought before us any contrary facts to deviate from the findings recorded the ld. CIT(A), we find no infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Addition of income as agricultural income - Held that - CIT(A) held that agricultural income credited in the capital account as ₹ 10,16,480/- is the correct figure and the mistake in not filing the return of income of ₹ 42,25,400/- was wrongly shown in the relevant column and it is not correct figure. The Assessing Officer, therefore, was directed to take the agricultural income of the assessee at ₹ 10,16,480/-. Genuineness of the agricultural income shown - Held that - CIT(A) while arriving at the findings considered that there was a mistake bona-fide in putting correct figure for agricultural income and following various Tribunal orders, this inadvertent bona-fide mistake was rectified by the ld. CIT(A), in which we find no infirmity. Secondly we observe that regarding genuineness of the agricultural income shown on the similar facts and circumstances in the preceding assessment year 2011-12, an addition of ₹ 4,58,100/- made by the Assessing Officer was confirmed and under the similar facts and circumstances. The ld. CIT(A) has maintained status quo and has restricted the addition to that extent, which also in our humble opinion has correctly done. We do not find any infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Unexplained cash deposit in bank account - Held that - The assessee had produced books of account which is evident even from the assessment order, from which cash deposit in the bank account was verifiable. AO has stated that the source of cash deposit in the bank account was not given, however, assessee has explained that it had come from agriculture income which the Assessing Officer has not believed. The Assessing Officer has also not brought out any specific reason as to why it cannot be accepted as agricultural income. We, therefore, find no infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) - Revenue appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Deletion of addition on account of Income from Astrology & Vastu Shastra.
2. Restriction of addition as income from other sources.
3. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained cash deposit in bank account.

Detailed Analysis:
1. Deletion of addition on account of Income from Astrology & Vastu Shastra:
The Assessing Officer made an addition of ?10,00,000 on the grounds that the assessee did not maintain a client register for calculation of total receipts in the astrology and vastu shastra profession. However, the ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition based on a previous appellate order for the assessment year 2011-2012, where a similar addition was deleted. The Tribunal upheld the ld. CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the relief granted was based on identical issues and facts from the previous assessment year, and no contrary evidence was presented by the Department to challenge the deletion.

2. Restriction of addition as income from other sources:
The Assessing Officer had made an addition of ?39,26,195 as income from other sources, which was later restricted by the ld. CIT(A) to ?4,58,100. The discrepancy arose from the incorrect reporting of agricultural income in the return. The ld. CIT(A) referred to relevant circulars and case laws to rectify the mistake, stating that the agricultural income credited in the capital account should be considered the correct figure. The Tribunal upheld this decision, noting that the ld. CIT(A) rectified a bona-fide mistake and followed precedents from the previous assessment year.

3. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained cash deposit in bank account:
The Assessing Officer added ?12,66,200 as income from undisclosed sources due to a cash deposit in the bank without a clear source. The ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition, highlighting that it was a continuous deposit throughout the year and was verifiable from the books of accounts. The Tribunal agreed with the ld. CIT(A), stating that the Assessing Officer failed to consider that the deposit was not a single entry but a continuous deposit from agricultural and professional income. The relief granted by the ld. CIT(A) was upheld, as the source of the cash deposit was explained and verifiable.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, confirming the decisions of the ld. CIT(A) on all three issues, based on factual and legal considerations presented during the proceedings.