9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (12) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pleted in this case on an income of Rs.1,29,626 which included a sum of Rs. 7,500 treated as income from undisclosed sources. In the original return filed by the assessee a sum of Rs. 14,750 was shown as agricultural income in Part 'F' of the return. When the ITO called for evidence, the assessee had produced memorandum book of agricultural income in support of the agricultural income returned. However, the ITO noticed that the memorandum book appeared to have been written up at a stretch and, therefore, he could not given full credit for the agricultural income shown and treated the sum of Rs. 7,500 as income from undisclosed sources. 3. On appeal, the ld. AAC in his order dt. 1st June,1965 deleted the addition. On appeal by the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this case is necessary." 4. The ld. AAC, in his turn, restored the matter by his order dt. 22nd Nov., 1967 to the ITO directing him to pass fresh orders in accordance with directions given by the Tribunal. That is way the matter came to be restored to the ITO for re-consideration. The ITO had called for details and the assessee's representative filed a reply dt. 17th Feb., 1978. The ITO was of the opinion that the assessee could not produce any satisfactory evidence and, therefore, he has again assessed a sum of Rs. 7,500 as income from undisclosed sources as in the original assessment. 5. On appeal before the CIT (Appeals) it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the agricultural income shown by the assessee was quite in or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him, the net income from agriculture would be between 30 per cent 40 per cent of the sale proceeds, the quantum of income assessed under other sources was also upheld by him. Hence the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. 7. At the time of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed a paper book and referred to the relevant portion thereof during the course of his argument. According to him, the ITO did not consider all the evidence filed by the assessee before him, and therefore, he has not carried out the necessary investigations directed to be done by the Tribunal in their order dt. 28th April, 1967. In particular, he has referred to the order of the AAC dt. 1st June,1965 in respect of asst. yrs. 1963-64 1964-65 wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment of income from undisclosed sources is quite justified. Further, he has strongly supported the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) especially the reasons given on merits. Therefore, he has justified the assessment of income from undisclosed sources. 9. We have duly considered the rival submissions and the paper book submitted by both the parties. The facts of the case for the earlier years as well as for the later years show that the income has been shown by the assessee from agriculture in section 'F' of the return filed. It is also undisputed that the income of Rs. 14,631 shown by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1966-67 had been accepted when it is stated that the entire extent of land was cultivated while in the asst. yr. 1965-66 only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter dt. 17th Dec., 1978 and verify the particulars which were necessary to decide the issue as directed by the Tribunal. In this case, the facts and circumstances of the case clearly show that there is no dispute about the possession of agricultural lands by the assessee and the whole issue revolves round the quantum of agricultural income shown by the assessee. The case of the Department is that the assessee had not produced evidence regarding ownership of lands, the extent thereof, sale proceeds, expenses and the net income thereof. The case of business is that necessary evidence regarding ownership of plots of lands to the extent of 17.68 acres and also taking over possession of 44 acres of land from the occupiers of the lands, namely, M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e another concern M/s. J.K. Iron Steel Co. had incurred loss in agricultural operation by pointing out that the concern had actually earned profit but on account of allowance of depreciation not loss was sustained. Moreover, the acceptance of income from agricultural operation shown by the assessee in subsequent years by the Revenue also cannot be ignored. Therefore, we are of considered opinion that the income from agriculture shown by the assessee should be accepted and the assessment of a portion thereof as income from undisclosed sources in unwarranted in view of the facts and circumstances of the case especially by findings of fact given by the AAC in his order dt. 1st June, 1975 with which we agree. 10. In the result, the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
