9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case properly before the AO, thus we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to pass assessment order afresh - The grounds raised in this appeal are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. - SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri Krishna V. Gujarathi For the Revenue : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.01.2024 passed by LD. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1) On the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the honorable CIT(A) has erred and is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 31,58,740/- by treating the cash deposits made by the assessee in the saving bank account of Dena Bank as unexplained income without appreciating the fact that the said cash deposited in the bank was out of agriculture sale proceeds. The appellant prays that the addition may please be deleted. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. AR submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not correct. It was submitted by ld. Counsel of the assessee that the assessee is an agriculturist and do not have any other income, therefore, return of income was not furnished by him. It was submitted that during the period under consideration, on various dates the assessee has deposited cash amounting in all to Rs. 31,58,740/- in his savings bank account maintained with Dena Bank. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee is in possession of substantial agricultural land along with his brother and involved in production of export quality roses in poly house. For this purpose, the assessee has also availed bank loan. It was submitted that the assessee is less literate and residing in remote area of Maharashtra do not have any knowledge regarding maintenance of records such as sale bills, purchase bills, vouchers for labour payment, transportation/diesel expense etc. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee is also involved in production of tomato and wheat and also doing production of rose on normal land (other tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A)/NFAC wherein a total of Rs. 65,15,000/- was estimated as sale of agricultural produce based on the calculation prepared by Professor of Agriculture College, Pune. In addition to above, it was also submitted that during the period from 07.09.2010 to 14.02.2011 an amount of Rs. 6,50,000/- was deposited in the same bank account and prior to deposit of above amount, Rs. 7,85,000/- was withdrawn. Accordingly, it was contended that withdrawn amount was again deposited into the Bank. In support of this contention copy of bank account statement was produced before ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, but ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not accepted the same. Ld. Counsel of the assessee further relied on various case laws wherein under similar circumstances, the estimation of agricultural income in the absence of bills and vouchers for sale of agricultural produce and receipt for expenses were estimated judiciously and the additions were deleted. In this regard, ld. AR relied on the following decisions :- (i) Smt. Annakkalanjiam Mathivanan ITA No.2451/Chny/2018 order dated 22.01.2019 (Chennai ITAT). (ii) ITO vs. Madhusudan Dhakad Harda, ITA No.09/Ind/2022 order dated 28.06.2022 (Indore ITAT). 7. Accordingly, ld. AR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtificate along with proposed plan was produced before ld. CIT(A)/NFAC along with bill of building contractor. It was submitted that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC therefore erred in not allowing the alternative claim regarding benefit of deduction u/s 54F of the IT Act by saying that the bill for construction does not appear to be genuine and no completion certificate of Government Authority was produced. In this regard, ld. AR submitted that a certificate from Architect Shri Sanjay Ugale along with sanctioned layout of house at village Janori and a completion certificate issued by Architect Shri Sanjah Ugale is obtained and produced before the Bench as additional evidence. It was accordingly requested before the Bench either to accept that the agricultural land sold is not a capital asset or alternatively to allow deduction u/s 54F of the IT Act by taking sale value of land at Rs. 40,25,000/-. 9. Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. Ld. DR relied on the following case laws in support of their contentions :- (i) Abhijit Subhas Gaikwad vs. DCIT, 60 taxmann.com 259 (Pune Trib.). (ii) Gopal C. Sharma vs. CIT, 209 ITR 946 (Bombay). (iii) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
