9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment upon search and seizure. The case of the assessee, for agricultural income, is from two sources of agricultural income. The finding recorded by the Commissioner is that nothing is forthcoming for accepting the agriculture income. Though a general ground is raised, in our considered view , after perusing the findings recorded by all the authorities under the Act on this behalf, we are satisfied that substantial questions do not arise, and we affirm the findings recorded on this behalf. Hence, the questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. - THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. V. BHATTI And THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI FOR THE PETITIONER : BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON; MEERA V. MENON FOR THE RESPONDENT : SC JOSE JOSEPH JUDGMENT [ ITA Nos. 67 / 2018 , 74 / 2018 , 66 / 2018 , 76 / 2018 , 53 / 2018 , 80 / 2018 ] S. V. Bhatti , J. Heard Adv. Meera V Menon and Adv. Jose Joseph for the parties. 2. One K M Fathima, Calicut/assessee, is the appellant in the batch of cases. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kochi/Revenue is the respondent. The assessee, being aggrieved by the common order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Colony, is not in the exclusive possession of Shri K A Rauf (2) The seized documents do not constitute valuable articles or things or books of accounts or documents belonging to the assessee herein. Therefore, the reassessment set in motion under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Act, the recomputation of return etc, is illegal and unauthorised. 2.2 The Assessing Authority answered the Principal objection of the assessee namely that the Shelter searched by Revenue did not exclusively belong to the assessee s husband by holding that the objection is not clear whether the search under Section 132 of the Act could be carried out only at places where the assessee has an exclusive right. A power of attorney resulting in the purchase of land and the documents seized constitute the description of documents, articles, and things stated in the seizure. Independent of the above, it is noticed by the assessing authority that, admittedly, the assessee herein is a partner in M/s. Nilambur Traders and Director of K A Latex (P) Ltd were covered by the notice issued under Section 132 of the Act. After rejecting the preliminary objection, the assessing authority examined the detai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Agricultural Income Total income assessed 2004-05 Rs.97,043/- Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.3,06,450/- 2005-06 Rs.69,248 Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.2,19,250/- 2006-07 Rs.1,01,802/- Rs.4,95,000/- Rs.8,35,400/- 2007-08 Rs.3,06,699/- Rs.5,10,000/- Rs.13,66,390/- 2008-09 Rs.3,06,634 Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.4,06,634/- 2009-10 Rs.4,48,333/- Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.5,48,330/- 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The first ground relates to Section 153A(a) read with Section 153C of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rejected the said contention by holding that the chronology of events and the facts reveal that the assessee is one of the dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 153C have been initiated, we find it difficult to appreciate how the assessee can object to the instant enquiry, mainly initiated by reference to documents recovered in the search. We express our agreement with the view expressed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal., which are again based on the documents seized, and the connection the said documents establish with the assessee. The questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. 6. As already marked in paragraph no.2.3, the next question relates to rejecting the claim of agricultural income and treating the income as income from other sources. The assessing authority called upon the assessee to establish the claim of agricultural income. As noted against the Assessment Year 2004- 05, except for claiming the agricultural income, the assessee or the representative who participated in the deliberation did not place any evidence before the assessing authority. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) examined in detail all these circumstances and rejected the claim of agricultural income held as follows: This issue has already been dealt with, in the appeal orders of Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
