9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he authority below there is no cogent evidence of agricultural income and agricultural expenses incurred by the assessee. Entire submissions of the assessee are an afterthought and make believe submission. We note that the revenue is not in appeal against the relief granted by learned CIT(A). In our considered opinion learned CIT(A) has granted more than fair relief to the assessee. The theory of agricultural income by the assessee is devoid of cogent evidence. In this view of the matter we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A) in this regard. Hence, we confirm the same. Addition for cash and jewellery - HELD THAT:- In the present case it is not at all the case that there is any seizure. The issue here is that cash and jewellery was found during search and the onus was upon the assessee to explain the same. However, before the Assessing Officer, as recorded in the assessment order the assessee has not made any submission in this regard after due notice. Before learned CIT(A) also nothing was submitted as it has been duly noted by learned CIT(A) that the assessee has all along being harping upon the validity of notice and jurisdiction of assessment. As noted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he body of the assessment order and same is not a curable defect, therefore the order passed should be treated as null and void liable to be quashed. V 3. Non-mention of approval u/s 153D in the body of assessment order is violation of Clause 9 of Manual of Office Procedure Volume II Technical February 2003 issued by Directorate of Income Tax on behalf of Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Government of India. III. Agricultural income Rs. 1.36.580/-: 4. The Id CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of agriculture income declared in return of income filed u/s 139 as well as u/s 153C of the Act, to the extent of Rs.1,36,580/- (AO added Rs.2,36,580/- and CIT(A) has given relief of Rs. 1,00,000/-) by considering the same as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act, without any reference to any incriminating material and therefore such addition cannot be made in relevant year in a proceeding u/s. 153C of the Act. The Id CIT (A) erred in confirming addition of agriculture income to the extent of Rs.1,36,580/- as unexplained cash credit for the year under consideration without considering the evidences like sample agriculture bills/agreemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6,79,680 AY 2015-16 6,82,450 AY 2016-17 6,98,251 AY 2017-18 6,99,490 In regard to above, please submit as under: a) Please explain as to where your Agricultural Land at which such activity is earned out is situated, with copy of registered agreement. b) Please explain measurement area of said land. c) Please submit relevant evidences to prove that agricultural activity has been carried out at said land. Please explain the type of agriculture crop in each year and quantity of agriculture produce. d) Please submit copies of bills for seeds/fertilizers/water bill/electricity bill/labour bills etc. e) Please explain the party-wise details of persons to whom sold agriculture produce is sold, rate of sale, and mode of payment received. Also please submit transportation receipts for carriage of agricultural produce. g) Please submit break-up of costs sale realization in each year. Please explain reasons of generating almost similar net profit in last 5 years, i.e. ranging between Rs. 6.50 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as further mentioned that the agricultural activity is done on contractual basis and the assessee gets 2/3 of net revenue proceeds after reducing all costs incurred from gross agricultural produce. However, the assessee has failed to submit any evidence in respect of the expenses incurred under the pretext that the agricultural are done through various contractors . The assessee has failed to submit any detail in respect of the gross agricultural produce, expenses incurred or details of the contractors through whom the agricultural activity is carried out. The assessee has also failed to submit expenses incurred in respect of water as well as electricity. In absence of the details of expenditure, the assessee has also failed to submit as to how the agricultural income as declared in the return is worked out. Thus, apart from some sample copies of gross agricultural produce as tabulated hereunder the assessee has failed to submit any documentary evidence in respect of agricultural income and expenses incurred to earn such income. The details of gross income in respect of agricultural produce as submitted by The assessee are as under :- Sr. No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, which are shown as under: Sr No. Assessment year Amount of sample vouchers Agriculture income shown 1 2011-12 nil 236580/- 2 2012-13 nil 242860/- 3 2013-14 52,849/- 658690/- 4 2014-15 nil 679680/- 5 2015-16 nil 682450/- 6 2016-17 4,24,182/- 698251/- 7 2017-18 Nil 6,99,490/- Further sales have been claimed to be made in cash and therefore it becomes difficult for verification. I am also unable to agree with the assessee that she will get 2/3 1 share of agricultural produce. Normally, it may not be more than 50% of the produce. Conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tracts were furnished before the authorities below learned counsel admitted that only a miniscule portion of the same was submitted. A perusal of them shows that it also mention status of the land is BANJAR i.e. non-cultivable. As already emanating from the orders of the authority below there is no cogent evidence of agricultural income and agricultural expenses incurred by the assessee. Entire submissions of the assessee are an afterthought and make believe submission. We note that the revenue is not in appeal against the relief granted by learned CIT(A). In our considered opinion learned CIT(A) has granted more than fair relief to the assessee. The theory of agricultural income by the assessee is devoid of cogent evidence. In this view of the matter we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A) in this regard. Hence, we confirm the same. 13. As regards the last ground of addition for cash and jewellery for A.Y. 2017-18, we note that in the assessment order the Assessing Officer noted that during the course of search these were found. The Assessing Officer has made addition by following observation : Vide Notice u/s 142(1) elated 16.11.2018 the following qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led. 5.4 In view of above, the amount of Rs. 8,36,996/- is added to total income of assessee u/s 69A under Income from Other Sources- Penalty proceedings are initiated separately for concealment of income. 14. Upon assessee s appeal in this regard learned CIT(A) has confirmed the addition holding as under : 10. During the course of search, cash of Rs.21,200/- and jewellery of Rs.8,15,796/- totaling to Rs.8,36,996/- was found and seized. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish any reply in this regard even though, she was given sufficient opportunities of being heard. This resulted into completion of assessment, as per host judgment in the manner laid down u/s.144 arid Assessing Officer also had to levy penalty u/s.271(l)(b) of the I.T. Act. Consequently, addition of Rs.8,36,996/- was made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee on this account. During the appellate proceedings also, the assessee failed to furnish any credible explanation or evidence in support of cash and jewellery found and seized and treated as unexplained by the Assessing Officer. Assessee only said that cash and jewellery found from its premised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case that there is any seizure. The issue here is that cash and jewellery was found during search and the onus was upon the assessee to explain the same. However, before the Assessing Officer, as recorded in the assessment order the assessee has not made any submission in this regard after due notice. Before learned CIT(A) also nothing was submitted as it has been duly noted by learned CIT(A) that the assessee has all along being harping upon the validity of notice and jurisdiction of assessment. As noted by us hereinabove this has been not been pressed by learned counsel. Even this plea of relief of jewellery found on the basis of CBDT guideline was also not made before learned CIT(A). Hence, this new plank raised by learned counsel is not emanating from the orders of authorities below. As noted by learned CIT(A) except for submitting that the items found in search were not unusual, no explanation was made by the assessee before learned CIT(A). In the absence of any material on record in this regard we are not inclined to grant any relief whatsoever by simply mentioning of that CBDT guideline. In this view of the matter this ground raised by the assessee stands dismissed. 18. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
