9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as valuation report is for the particular data entry and cannot be applied without any verification of the actual teak trees and its price per tree. The documents shows that the assessee has given all the details including the price adopted for sale rate as well the purchase price and therefore the findings given by the CIT(A) are correct and there is no need to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A), thus ground no. 1 of Revenue s appeal is dismissed. Disallowance of income from other sources - DR submitted that the amount credited in bank account and books of accounts is not justifiable as the books in fact the accounting and tax treatment of the assessee company was rejected by the AO - As same amount was not received by assessee as payment for the sale of teak trees and there is unexplained credit in assessee s bank and books of accounts chargeable to tax u/s. 68 - HELD THAT:- There is no reasoning given for rejecting the books of account and tax treatment given by the assessee company. In fact, no discrepancy has been pointed out by AO by rejecting the same. The assessee has given a reconciled order identification vis- -vis the original agreements made to the pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ircumstances of the respondent's case the learned CITIA) has grossly erred in dismissing Ground No. 1 of the respondent's appeal challenging the validity of the assessment order impugned before him. 2 In law and in the facts and circumstances of the respondent's case the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 6,02,985 (out of the addition of Rs 1,78,94,985 made by the learned Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961) on the ground that unlike the remaining amount of Rs. 1,72,92,000 (which represented the respondent's liability to its Members and for which reason it was not the respondent's income at all) the remaining amount of Rs. 6,02,985 was not the respondent's liability to its Members, and was, therefore the respondent's income. He ought to have appreciated, inter alia, that in any case, since it was agricultural in nature, it was not assessable at all. 3. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the respondent's case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,87,317 made by the learned Assessing Officer on account of interest on bank deposits. He ought to have appre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... served to be cancelled. 7. The respondent craves leave to add, amend and/or alter the ground or grounds of Cross-objections either before or at the time of hearing." Additional Grounds of C.O. filed by the assessee "Appellant craves leave to raise this additional ground of appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a legal ground and therefore as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power (229 ITR 383) it can be raised before the Hon'ble ITAT. 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in holding ground raised before him regarding sale of teak tree as agriculture income as grown on agricultural land as infructuous and does not require any adjudication. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have adjudicated this contention and held income from teak tree as agriculture income. It be so held now. 2. Ld. CIT (A) ought not to have made any addition as net results of capital WIP expenditure for teak trees and total deposits received from members is loss and accordingly there should not be any addition and corresponding loss ought to be allowed as set off in subsequent years. It be so held now. Appellant also craves leave to add, amend, alter, change ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to time and furnished written submissions. The Assessing Officer observed that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee's audited accounts were called for the year under consideration which were filed by the assessee company except tax audit report which was not obtained since the company had reported no receipt of income in its profit and loss account for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had shown outstanding liability under the head other current liabilities payable to members on account of teak tress amounting to Rs. 1,94,985/- as against Rs. nil as on 31-03-2011. The assessee company claimed TDS credit in respect of interest income of Rs. 1,40,785/- as per 26AS Form for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer further observed that assessee company has not included any receipts from the above two revenue streams in its profit and loss account. The assessee company had been engaged in the business of growing teak tree on behalf of its members and the company had launched a plantation scheme in the name and style of golden tree plantation scheme in the financial year 1996 and mobilized huge funds f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e relevant materials available on record. The finding given by the ld. CIT(A) that the entire teak trees were sold during the year appears to be correct and the contention of the ld. Departmental Representative that the documents were not provided based on the assessment order is not supported by the findings given by the CIT(A) as well as the submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. There is no discrepancy as such pointed out by the Assessing Officer related to the valuation of the teak tree given by the assessee as per the various documents. The so called discrepancy pointed out by the ld. Departmental Representative about the insurance policy report as well as valuation report is for the particular data entry and cannot be applied without any verification of the actual teak trees and its price per tree. The documents shows that the assessee has given all the details including the price adopted for sale rate as well the purchase price and therefore the findings given by the CIT(A) are correct and there is no need to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A), thus ground no. 1 of Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 9. As regards ground no. 2 relating to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sampling certificate, register, showing money received from members permission received from tax department for sale of teak trees and all the relevant documents related to the same. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the said addition in respect of amount credited in bank account. Thus, Ground No. 2 of revenue's appeal is dismissed. 12. As relates to cross objection filed by the assessee, ground nos. 1 and 4 to 7 as well as additional grounds are related to challenging the validity of the assessment order, interest, penalty. The ld. Authorized Representative submitted that in fact, the agricultural income is not taxable and therefore the assessment order itself is not justified. The said contention of the ld. Authorized Representative related to cross objection relating to validity of assessment order is not justifiable and the company is not agriculturist but it is a corporation and therefore the income derived does not appears to be agricultural income. Therefore, ground nos. 1 and 4 to 7 as well additional grounds of the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed. 13. As regards ground no. 2 of cross objection relates to confirming addition of Rs. 6,02,98 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
