9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is not doing any business as there is no discussion by the AO in the body of the assessment order on this issue. Under these circumstances when it is the claim of the assessee that only source of income is agriculture, therefore, in our opinion, the matter requires a re-visit to the file of the AO with a direction to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case with necessary evidence to his satisfaction. Needless to say the AO shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No.45/PN/2016 - - - Dated:- 15-4-2016 - SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.1 After several reminders the Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared before the AO. After verifying the requisite details filed before him the AO allowed the claim of deduction of ₹ 21,63,300/- u/s.54F towards purchase of residential house. 3.2 As regards the agricultural income is concerned, the assessee submitted receipt of sale of Santra, Mosambi etc. to Md. Saleem and Company by issue of net bill of ₹ 6,55,685/-. The AO verified 7/12 extracts for the F.Y. 2008-09 and noted that against the name of the assessee Bhausaheb Sheshrao Kachakure the crops Cotton and Gobi are appearing. For A.Y. 2007-08 also crops Cotton and Maize are appearing. In view of the above, the AO observed that prima-facie the crops shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 for F.Y. 2008-09. In view of the statement of Talati as well as the authorized persons of Md. Saleem and Company the AO again issued a show cause notice to the assessee asking him to show cause as to why the income shown against sale of Mosambi at ₹ 6,55,685/- should not be treated as his unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. 5. It was submitted that Mosambi must have been remained to be included in the land record maintained at Talati office for the F.Y. 2008-09 as these were appearing in 2006-07. However the AO on verification of land records shown by Talati and placed on record noted that such crop is not appearing in F.Y. 2007-08 and 2009-10 also. In view of the above and considering the fact that even the sale pattis produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings, the assessee has never demanded for cross examination. It is not the case of the assessee that the evidences collected by the AO were not shown to him for his perusal and comments. 8. Further, the letter issued by the Talati filed by him which shows entry of Mosambi only during F.Y. 2006-07 and 2011-12 is inconceivable. According to him, Mosambi tree is not seasonal crop or an annual crop and is a perennial crop. Therefore, it is impossible that only the records for F.Y.2006-07 and 2011-12 can show Mosambi crops and for remaining years it will not be shown. According to him, the Mosambi tree continues to bear fruits for 10 to 12 years before it requires to be removed. Therefore, it is impossible for a Talati or an official or any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 12. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently challenged the order of the CIT(A). He submitted that due to lack of proper guidance, the addition has been made by the AO u/s.69A to the tune of ₹ 6,55,685/- on account of sale of Mosambi. He submitted that the land held by the assessee contained Mosambi trees and the assessee has also sold the same. Since the AO had not allowed cross examination of the persons whose statements were recorded and used against the assessee, therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice. He submitted that in the interest of justice one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate his case to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the AO and denied to have issued any such bill to the assessee. Further, the Talati who was summoned by the AO and whose statement was recorded had also stated that the crop Mosambi is not appearing in the 7/12 extracts of the land held in the name of the assessee nor in the name of other persons appearing in Gut No.117. In view of the above and in absence of any satisfactory explanation given by the assessee the AO rejected the claim of agricultural income of ₹ 6,55,685/- which has been upheld by the CIT(A). 15. From the record, we find the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings, has filed another letter from Talati which shows Mosambi trees appearing in the 7/12 extracts for F.Y. 2006-07 and 2011-12. However, the auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
