9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sition that any agricultural land with commercial / cash crop would fetch net income of Rs.20,000/- per acre. The agricultural land of the assessee, being Ac.23.91 cnts, the CIT(A) viewed that it is reasonable to earn Rs.4,78,200/- (i.e. Rs.20,000/- x Ac.23.91 cnts) as the ownership was not in doubt. CIT(A) therefore, directed the AO to restrict the addition to Rs.4,78,200/- and disallow Rs.71,800/-. We find, that the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly estimated the agricultural income of the assessee basing on the valid proposition. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground. Unexplained cash deposits - HELD THAT:- Since the assessee has no regular source of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the Ld.CIT(A) and allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground. - I.T.A.No.96/Viz/2019 & 97/Viz/2019 - - - Dated:- 29-3-2023 - SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN , HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR For the Respondent : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR) ORDER Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : Condonation of Delay : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-3 vide Order dated 15.10.2018 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2012-13 with the delay of 54 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that Sri P.Nooka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer(AO) had rejected the agricultural income admitted by the assessee at Rs.5,50,000/- and also the cash deposits made into the bank account to the tune of Rs.1,80,400/- in the absence of satisfactory explanation with proper evidence. The AO has completed the assessment proceedings and passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C, by adding back Rs.1,80,400/- to the income returned and treating the agricultural income as Nil. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds : 1. The order of the Learned Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y agricultural land with commercial / cash crop will fetch net income of Rs.20,000/- per acre. Therefore, pleaded to confirm the addition sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is apparent from the records that the assessee has taken agricultural lands to the extent of Ac.23.91 cnts from his grandfather, grandmother and uncle on lease and cultivating cashew, casurina, paddy etc, which was verified by the Ld.CIT(A) from the records produced before him. The Ld.CIT(A) has also perused the confirmation letters produced by the assessee from Sri Pilli Rajulu, grandfather, Smt. K.Akkamma, grandmother and Sri K.Vijay Kuma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds may be urged at the time of hearing. 9. Ground No.1 and 4 are general in nature which do not require specific adjudication. 10. Ground No.2 is related to unexplained cash deposits. During the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that there are several cash deposits in the bank accounts held by the assessee in Axis bank and Yes bank. Since the assessee has no regular source of income and could not explain the sources of cash deposits, the assessee treated the amount of Rs.1,98,000/- as unexplained income and brought to tax. 11. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) restricted the addition to Rs.1,33,000/- since there is corroborative evidence of a gift of Rs.50,000/- recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash deposits of Rs.15,000/- as explained, as in the earlier years, the agricultural income earned by the assessee is reasonable and treated the cash deposits to the extent of Rs.1,33,000/- as unexplained. Since, the assessee could not furnish any corroborative evidence either during the appellate proceedings or before the Tribunal except the confirmation letter for the gift received, we are inclined to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground. 15. Ground No.3 is related to investment towards insurance premium of Rs.90,000/-. The assessee contended that insurance premium of Rs.90,000/- was made out of gross earnings received through agriculture and auto consultancy. The assessee furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
