9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short 'the Act'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information available with the Income Tax Department that during the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, assessee had deposited Rs. 14,00,500 in his bank account maintained with HDFC Bank, A.O. initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act, after recording reasons and obtaining approval from the Pr. CIT. and issued notices under section 148 & 142(1) of the Act. However, the A.O. did not receive any response from the assessee. Second notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued along with final show cause notice for non compliance and the same were served through affixture. This time also the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;s father, and no salary is drawn for his services by the assessee the gift from assessee's father could not be reasoned as ungenuine. 3. The Worthy CIT (A) while ignoring the claim of the assessee for cash gift has failed to appreciate the fact that agriculturists rely on cash rather than banking channels for their transactions. 4. The Worthy CIT (A) while ignoring the claim of the assessee for cash gift has erred in estimating that an amount of Rs. 25000/- per acre return. The worthy CIT(A) has failed to acknowledge the fact that Rs. 25000/- per acre per annum was rate for lease of land for agricultural purposes in the year under consideration. Therefore, it cannot be reasoned that a person would do farming himself when he could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced by the assessee. The Ld. Counsel further contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has estimated the agriculture income of the father of the assessee @ 25,000/- per acre without any basis. The Ld. CIT(A) has estimating the agricultural income @ Rs. 25,000/- per acre without taking into consideration the fact that Rs. 25,000/- per acre was rate of lease of land for agriculture purpose in the year under consideration. The department has not disputed the fact that the father of the assessee was holding 16 acres of agricultural land. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition to the extent of 50% of the amount received in cash by under estimating the income of the father of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel placing reliance on the judgment of the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e cash deposited to 50% by estimating the income of the father from whom the assessee has received gift in cash. The Ld. CIT(A) has estimated the agricultural income of the father of the assessee @ 25,000/- per acre on the basis of girdawari details available on record. The contention of the Ld. Counsel is that the Ld. CIT(A) has under estimated the income of the father of the assessee and wrongly sustained 50% of the said amount. 8 Admittedly, during the relevant period, the father of the assessee was holding 16 acres of cultivable land. The Department has also not denied or rejected the plea of the assessee that the assessee received gift in cash and through cheques and RTGS etc. from his father. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
