9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Choudhary for the assessment year 2008-09 has been scrutinized and then the same had been accepted which includes the investment in the agricultural land in the name of the assessee. Agricultural income - Held that:- It is noted from the records that the assessee had purchased the agricultural land on 14-05-2007 at Sri Ganganagar which indicates that the assessee was having agricultural income from Rabi and Kharif crops. The assessee had shown the agricultural income of ₹ 1.06 lacs and the same had also been shown in the return of income. The AO did not accept this amount of ₹ 1.06 lacs as agricultural income of the assessee as the assessee had not produced the bills and vouchers for sale of crops and the same had also been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is in cash and is being kept at home only, thus addition made deserves to be deleted. 1.2 That the ld. CIT(A) has further erred in upholding the assumptions and presumptions of the AO in relation to expenses and savings of assessee, thus addition made deserves to be deleted. 2. On the facts and circumstances ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the action of AO in treating the agricultural income of ₹ 1,06,000/- as income from undisclosed sources solely for the reason that there were no bills and vouchers of the crop sold by grossly ignoring the fact that assessee is owner of agricultural land and is regularly having agriculture income, therefore, the income deserves to be treated as agricultural income. 3. On the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Choudhary has made any disclosure u/s 132(4) of the Act and under which hands. It is pertinent to mention here that the assessment order in the case of the appellant was made on 12-01-2015 whereas the return of income was filed by Shri Naresh Choudhary on24-04-2015 i.e. after the completionof the assessment in the case of the appellant. Further, showing the investment in the fund flow statement of Shri Naresh Choudhary do not ipso factor leads to the conclusion that the same has been accepted by the AO of Shri Naresh Choudhary. (viii) Therefore, in the totality of facts and circumstances of the case it is held that this new plea of the appellant cannot be accepted and it is nothing but an after thought as the appellant failed miserably b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.4 The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.5 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. This is a fact Shri Naresh Kumar Choudhary is a son of the assessee had filed the return of income and in his premises search operation was carried out. In response to notice issued u/s 153A of the Act, the amount invested in agricultural land in the name of the assessee has been offered for taxation. This is evident from the cash flow statement placed at page 4 of the paper book. In case the addition is sustained in the case of the assessee then it will amount to double taxation on the same amount. The return of income of Shri Naresh Kumar Choudhary for the assessment year 2008-09 has been scrutiniz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ught on record to controvert the findings of the AO. (iii) In view of the above discussion, it is held that the AO was justified in not accepting the agriculture income of ₹ 1,06,000/- declared by the appellant in her return of income and rightly assessed it as income from other sources . Hence, this ground of appeal is rejected. 3.2 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is noted from the records that the assessee had purchased the agricultural land on 14-05-2007 at Sri Ganganagar which indicates that the assessee was having agricultural income from Rabi and Kharif crops. The assessee had shown the agricultural income of ₹ 1.06 lacs and the same had also been shown in the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
