Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (3) TMI 1264

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l products/produce. Both of the authorities have failed to discharge their duties properly as none of the parties have brought any substantial material on record to prove that assessee has incurred expenses over and above what has been stated by the assessee. AO has made a ground that some income received by the assessee was in the nature of non-agriculture and substantial too in nature, whereas ld. CIT(A) has gone on a different footing that assessee has incurred expenses to earn the said income which seems to be understated - we are not in a position to sustain the order of the ld. CIT(A) as the same appeared to be a guess work to sustain the addition made by the AO and therefore, we are inclined to set aside the order of first appellate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tates that only agricultural operation was carried out on 30% of the land where as the remaining land was not used for any agricultural activities and consequently , the case of the assessee was reopened u/s.147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s.148 dated 20/03/2018. During the assessment proceedings, AO noticed that assessee has shown agriculture income of ₹ 51,53,470/- and after claiming agricultural expenses , the net income was shown as 46,77,091/- which was confronted to the assessee along with the various documents collected by the AO from ISRO, Ahmedabad and accordingly, show-cause notice was issued on 22/12/2018 as to why agricultural income of ₹ 51,53,470/- should not be treated as unexplained cash credit which was duly .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... shown agricultural income to the tune of ₹ 51,53,470/- and it is for her to prove that the same has been generated from agriculture. However, this is not proved. Then, it has to be presumed that it is the unexplained cash credit of the assessee. The Learned Counsel further relied on the order of the CIT(A) in the appellant's own case for AY 2014-15 wherein the AO has made an addition of 20% of gross agricultural receipts as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act and the appeal was allowed by the CIT(A). The addition was made by the AO as the assessee had claimed a mere 2% of gross agricultural receipts as expenditure which is meager and negligible. According to the AO, the expenditure incurred to earn the agricultural income .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3 acres of land. The Learned Counsel for the appellant also submitted that some of the lands in the images provided by ISRO do not belong to the assessee. Be that as it may, it is for the assessee to prove not only the ownership of land but also the agricultural activity carried on in that land, the sales receipts for the produce and also the expenditure. In this case, there are two unrealistic/impractical features which are incurrence of expenditure of a mere 2% and unbelievably high yield of agricultural income from the land holding i.e. ₹ 51.53 lacs from 10.3 acres. Unlike in the assessment year 2014-15, the AO for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 had done enquiries and investigation and on the basis of the same had arrived at a reasonable a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s being grown in the said land. The only objection of the AO is that the assessee is having a farmhouse and income was received from the natural activity which is not agricultural activity as per the provisions of the Act and AO has merely acted on the basis of surmises and conjuncture in estimating 20% of the total receipt as unexplained cash credit without carrying out any further verification from the buyer/purchasers of these agricultural products/produce. The ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the AO on the ground that the assessee has incurred a very meager expenses of 2% on agricultural expenses and thus sustained the addition as stated hereinabove. In this case, we note that both of the authorities have failed to discharge their dutie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates