9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... area for bunds. The AO found that the assessee had declared to the bank that he has developed the fish ponds in the 90% of the water spread area, leaving 10% of the land for bunds and taken the bank loan of Rs. 1.00 crore for developing the fish ponds. Since the assessee himself had accepted that the water spread area is 90% of the fish pond, the AO did not accept the submission of the assessee and the guidelines of the CBDT to consider 70% of water spread area for estimation of income. The assessing officer heavily placed reliance on the assessee's letter for water spread area of 90% and estimated the income @Rs.15,000/- per acre on 90% of water spread area. For estimation of income @ Rs. 15,000/- per acre, the AO has taken comparable cases where income was admitted at Rs. 20,000/- per acre in the vicinity of the cultivation undertaken by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Against the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the AO esti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horities. This view is also supported by the order of this Tribunal in Krishna Fisheries supra. Therefore, we consider 70% of water spread area is reasonable. 8. The next issue in this ground is estimation of income. The AO estimated the income at Rs. 15,000/- per acre which was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A). The assessee relied on the decision of Krishna Fisheries, Vijayawada cited (supra) and requested for scaling down the estimation to Rs. 13,300/- per acre. The assessment year involved in the case of Krishna Fisheries relied upon by the Ld.AR is related to the A.Y.2006-07 to 2011-12, whereas in the instant case, the assessment year involved is 2014-15. In the case relied upon by the Ld.AR, the Ld.CIT(A) estimated the income at Rs. 13,300/- per acre, which was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) and upheld by the ITAT. In the case of the assessee, the AO estimated the income at Rs. 15,000/- per acre which was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A). The AO has also brought on record, the comparable cases, wherein, the income admitted was Rs. 20,000/- per acre. Neither before the AO, nor before the CIT(A), the assessee has made out a case that the income was lesser than Rs. 15,000/- per acre. During the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee with HDFC bank, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs. 4,67,500/- on 04-04- 2O13, and Rs. 9,50,000/- on 06.05.2013, which were utilized for repayments of gold loans obtained during the earlier year. Further, on verification of books of accounts, it was seen that the said transactions were not recorded in the books of accounts. After duly giving show cause to the assessee and discussing the reply filed, the Assessing Officer proceeded to add the said amount of Rs. 14,17,500/- as the assessee's unexplained income. During the course of appellate proceedings, it is the contention of the appellant's AR that the receipt of gold loan was not recorded in the books for the reason that this loan was utilized for agricultural purposes and not for any business purposes. It is further argued that the repayment Rs. 14,17,500/- has been done out of the agricultural income of the appellant, This argument however does not carry any weight. The net agricultural income admitted by the appellant is Rs. 2,00,000/- only, and no documentary evidence has been submitted, either during assessment or during appellate proceedings, to prove that the gros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the paddy field were said to have been deposited in the Bank account for repayment of the Bank loan, therefore, argued that the source stands explained, hence no addition is required to be made. In this connection, as per the bank account, the assessee has paid a sum of Rs. 4,67,500/- on 04.04.2013 and Rs. 9,50,000/ on 06.05.2013. The assessee has stated that the assessee had taken gold loan to meet the agricultural operations and incurred the said amount of Rs. 14,17,500/- for agricultural operations. The assessee has not produced any bills and vouchers with regard to the agricultural operations and the expenditure incurred. The assessee also did not give break-up of expenses incurred for cultivating the 10 acres of agricultural land. The assessee neither furnished the break-up of expenses nor produced the bills and vouchers. The assessee also did not furnish the date of taking the gold loan. As per the bank account copy placed before us, the account was opened on 01.12.2012 by the time the entire agricultural operations of Rabi crop would be completed except the tilling activities. Therefore, the explanation of the assessee that the gold loan was utilized for the purpose of ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplanation offered by the assessee and made the addition of Rs. 10,38,604/- on account of cash deficit. 16. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. However, before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee brought arithmetical mistake in working out of the cash deficit to the notice of the Ld.CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 4,97,873/- and the Ld.CIT(A) directed the AO to examine the issue and make the correct amount of addition. 17. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 18. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the instant case, the AO estimated the income from pisciculture as well as from sale of liquor after rejecting the books of accounts. The AO also made the unaccounted cash deposit as per books of accounts. Once, the AO rejects the books of accounts and estimate the income, the AO is not permitted to revisit the same books of accounts and bring the cash deficit as income in the hands of the assessee unless there are unexplained investments. Therefore, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and delete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
