2018 (9) TMI 534 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of Agricultural income - nature of income from sale of agricultural produce, i.e. , sugarcane seeds grown by the assessee from the lease hold land carrying out basic operation on land involving expenditure of human skill such as ploughing, tilling, sowing and planting of seeds - Held that - Similar disputed issue was dealt by this bench of the Tribunal in the case of Smt. Asha Manjari Mishra 2017 (3) TMI 1698 - ITAT CUTTACK wherein held A.R. could not bring any relevant and cogent material on record to controvert the findings of the AO as well as the CIT(A) that the appellant received the sugarcane seeds from Nayagarh Sugarcane Complex Ltd. in her planting village Panipoila on 06.12.2012 and supplied it to the farmer who planted it on 18.12.2012 in his planting village at Gunthuni. According to the appellant s own written submission-dated 18th November 2016, in which the appellant has explained the agricultural process, it takes 1 to 2 months time for buds and 6 to 12 months time for small plants to develop from the seeds. If this is so, then how could the appellant take supply of the seeds on 06.12.2012 and supply the sugarcane plants on 18.12.2012. - Decided against assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of agricultural income
2. Exemption under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act
3. Application of judicial precedents

Issue 1: Disallowance of agricultural income
The appellant contested the addition of ?38,31,518 as disallowance of agricultural income by the Assessing Officer (AO). The appellant argued that the income was derived from sale and supply of seeds for sugar cane, involving various agricultural operations and expenses. Evidence of expenses and agricultural activities was submitted during the hearing. The appellant claimed exemption under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act, stating that agricultural income is not taxed. The Tribunal noted that agricultural income is exempt under Section 10(1) and covers income derived from land through agricultural operations. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the jurisdictional High Court to support the appellant's claim that the seed produced through agricultural activity is exempt from taxation.

Issue 2: Exemption under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act
The appellant argued that the income earned from agricultural land through agricultural processes and sale of agricultural produce is exempt under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant presented documents supporting the agricultural activities and income derived from leasehold land. The Tribunal found that the income falls under Section 2(1A) of the Income Tax Act, qualifying for exemption under Section 10(1). The appellant emphasized that the agricultural income should not have been treated as non-agricultural income by the AO, and the addition made was unjust and arbitrary.

Issue 3: Application of judicial precedents
The Tribunal referenced previous cases and judicial precedents to support its decision. It highlighted that a similar disputed issue had been addressed in a previous case involving the same bench. The Tribunal noted that the appellant failed to provide relevant material to counter the findings of the AO and CIT(A). Based on the judicial precedence and the specific circumstances of the case, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee, following the decision of the Tribunal in a similar case.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the applicability of legal provisions and judicial precedents in determining the tax treatment of agricultural income. The Tribunal's decision was based on the exemption criteria under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act and the specific facts presented during the proceedings.