RAMESH VITTAL PAWAR,SOLAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2, SATARA, SATARA

Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 51 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay. Main reason for delay is stated to be that the notices were sent on the email id of the Tax Consultant who did not inform the assesssee. Due to this 2 Ramesh Vittal Pawar

The only issue for our consideration is disallowance of Agricultural income made by the Assessing Officer at Rs.70,05,962/-.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is into Agricultural activity for past many years and maintains complete details as placed in the paper book running into 304 pages. He however submitted that certain details could not be filed before the Assessing Officer and subsequently before ld.CIT(A) claim of Agricultural income remained unsubstantiated as no satisfactory proof nor explanation was provided. He only prayed for affording one more opportunity to go before ld. Juri ictional Assessing Officer for necessary verification of record to which ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of ld.CIT(A) but did not object to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. We note that in the return f income for A.Y. 2020-21 filed on 28.01.2021 assessee has shown Agricultural income at Rs.34,21,102/-. During the course of assessment proceedings carried out u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act, ld. Assessing Officer observed that assessee has shown gross Agricultural income at Rs.70.05.962/- and claimed expenditure at Rs.35,84,860/-. However, for want of necessary details about the agricultural land holding of the assessee as well as incidental expenditure incurred for carrying out the Agricultural activity ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the claim and made addition of Rs.70,05,962/-. Before the First Appellate Authority also assessee failed to succeed as necessary details could not be filed.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has furnished paper book which provides copy of land holding and crop details as per 7/12 extract, sales ledger of Agricultural income, sale bills of agricultural produce and bank statements and loan statements from bank to demonstrate that regular agricultural activity has been carried out.

Considering all these, we are of the considered opinion that in the larger interest of justice, the issue of Agricultural income needs verification and deserves to be set aside to the file of ld. Juri ictional Assessing Officer for necessary adjudication to be carried out considering the details to be filed by the assessee. In view thereof, the issue is remitted back to the file of ld. JAO. Needless to mention that ld. JAO in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update email and contact detail on the 4 Ramesh Vittal Pawar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “B” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,