2019 (10) TMI 573 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of claim of agricultural income - addition qua the long term capital gains - Admission of additional evidence - HELD THAT - These matters are identical so also the plea taken in respect of filing of the additional evidence. On a consideration of the nature of the evidence sought to be produced, we are satisfied that such evidence has a bearing on the extent of liability to tax of the assessee. We, therefore, find that the evidence sough to be produced is relevant and since all the endeavor of the authorities under the Income- tax Act is to reach the just tax liability of the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that no prejudice would be caused to any of the parties by admitting all the additional evidence and setting aside the matter to the ld. AO to appreciate the contentions of the assessee in the light of such additional evidence.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the order of CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2009-10 regarding assessment of income, addition of long term capital gains, and disallowance of claim of agricultural income.

Analysis:
The appellant sold agricultural land during the financial year 2008-09 and was assessed by the AO under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, resulting in an income assessment of ?1,21,97,890. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, deleting the disallowance of agricultural income but confirming the addition of long term capital gains.

The appellant, being an agriculturist, claimed unawareness of income tax procedures, leading to the inability to produce documentary evidence initially. Subsequently, they gathered evidence such as a certificate from Tehsildar, PWD B&R Branch letter, and other documents to support their claim. The appellant requested admission of these documents for a thorough adjudication of the matter.

The appellant's sisters faced a similar situation and produced additional evidence in their appeals. The Tribunal accepted the evidence, remanding the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication following the directions in a previous case. Considering the similarity of facts, the Tribunal decided to follow the same course in the present matter.

After hearing the arguments, the Tribunal found the evidence sought to be relevant to the assessment of the appellant's tax liability. Hence, the Tribunal allowed the additional evidence, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the AO for fresh disposal based on the additional evidence and previous directions.

Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant evidence in determining the just tax liability.