SATENDRA SINGH,KANPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(5), KANPUR

I.T.A. No.120/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2019-20 1

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.120/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2019-20 Satendra Singh Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Vill. Bamburaha Chanwar, 1(3)(5) Kanpur-209206. Aayakar Bhawan, 16/69, Civil Lines, Kanpur-208001. PAN:HLUPS0521N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None (Adj. Application) Respondent by Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT (D.R.) O R D E R

(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.120/LKW/2026 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2019-20 against impugned appellate order dated 04.12.2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1083316243(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The grounds of appeal are as under: -

“01. THAT the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has failed to appreciate that the books of account are duly audited and net profit rate worked out at least 8% then the expenses claimed are duly verified by the auditor, therefore disallowing the expenses to extent of 25% by the AO and also upheld by the CIT(A) are contrary to facts and be deleted. 02. THAT the books of account are duly audited, no discrepancy point out by the AO nor by the CIT(A), hence 25% disallowance on expenses are not to provisions of law be allowed. 03. THAT the CIT(A)/NFAC as well as AO has failed to appreciate that the assessee holding about 100 bigha agricultural land (own, fathers and rent) and produced the White Pumkin (Kumhda), and sold to small vender of mandi, thus earing of Rs.6,45,128/- as agricultural income, which income disallowed by the AO as well as upheld by the CIT(A), which is contrary to facts, bad in law, be deleted. 04. That the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has failed to appreciate that the assessee has already produced the Khasra-khatauni of agricultural land

I.T.A. No.120/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2019-20 2

and also proof of certificate of land-owner, all evidences were ignored by the AO as well as CIT(A), the addition made be deleted. 05. That the appellant craves leaves to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.” (B) In this case, assessment order dated 01.03.2024 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.15,16,281/- as against returned income of Rs.2,49,110/-. This assessment order was passed ex parte qua the appellant assessee. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs.6,22,043/- was made on account of disallowance of business expenses. Further, addition of Rs.6,45,128/- was made, which was claimed by the assessee to be agricultural income, and exempt. Vide impugned appellate order dated 04.12.2025, the aforesaid addition of agricultural income of Rs.6,45,128/- was confirmed. Further, out of the aforesaid expenses amounting to Rs.3,73,226/- disallowed by the Assessing Officer, relief was given by the Ld. CIT(A) partly and remaining disallowance was confirmed. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 04.12.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of records, it is found that the assessee has claimed that the assessee was holding about 100 bighas of agricultural land (own, father’s and rental). The assessee claimed to have produced/cultivated White Pumpkin (Kumhda) on the land, and to have sold the produce to small vendors in mandi. The assessee has also claimed that the relevant evidences for holding agricultural land were furnished, but were ignored by the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A). In respect of the disallowance out of business expenses, the assessee contended in the grounds of appeal that books of account were duly audited and no discrepancy was pointed out by the Assessing Officer and by the Ld. CIT(A) and the profit as per books of account were already disclosed by the assessee in the return of income. On perusal of records, however, these

I.T.A. No.120/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2019-20 3

contentions of the assessee are not borne out from materials on record of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. (C) At the time of hearing, the learned Departmental Representative was heard. He left the decision to the discretion of the Bench. In view of the facts and circumstances as discussed in foregoing paragraph (B) of this order, the impugned appellate order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and both the disputes, regarding claim of agricultural income and regarding disallowance of out of business expenses, are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Ld. DR for Revenue was expressed no objection to this at the time of hearing. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions. (D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 21.04.2026) Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Dated: 21.04.2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A)