Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 arose from proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The case was called twice, and the assessee did not appear, leading to an ex-parte proceeding. The Assessing Officer had initially found in favor of the assessee regarding agricultural income.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had acknowledged the assessee's agricultural activities and potato produce. Despite the cash deposits not being fully reconciled, the Tribunal held that they represented agricultural income up to Rs.1 lakh.
Key Issues
Whether cash deposits in the bank account, despite some lack of reconciliation, could be considered as agricultural income, given the Assessing Officer's own findings.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Date of hearing 18.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 18.08.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT(A)- 4, Kolkata’s order dated 29.11.2024 having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1070772456(1), involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. She is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities’ respective detailed findings have rightly treated the assessee’s cash deposits in her bank account of Rs.10.78 lakhs as unexplained, in assessment order dated 14.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
It is in this factual backdrop that the tribunal hereby notices from a perusal of case records that the learned Assessing Officer has himself given a categorical finding in assessee’s favour that not only she had been cultivating her agricultural lands but also she had kept her potato produce in a cold storage whose receipts have been incorporated in the assessment order itself. That being the case, the necessary inference which arises in the given facts is that the impugned cash deposits added in the assessee’s hands amounting to Rs.10.78 lakhs; although not satisfactorily reconciled before the learned lower authorities, represent the assessee’s agricultural income which deserves to be upheld to the tune of Rs.1 lakh only with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs.9.78 lakhs in other words.
2 | P a g e Necessary computation shall follow as per law. Ordered accordingly.