TATTARUPARAMBIL MATHEW JOSEPH,KAPUTHADKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUTTUR

ITA 473/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 May 2026AY 2020-2110 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee declared substantial agricultural income for AY 2020-21, significantly higher than previous years. The AO disallowed this income, citing lack of proper documentation for lease rent and sale of rubber, and the alleged invalidity of the lease deed. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue of lease receipt of Rs. 20 lakhs to the AO for fresh examination with additional evidence. However, it directed the AO to allow the remaining agricultural income of Rs. 8,12,700/- as claimed by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the entire agricultural income claimed by the assessee is to be disallowed due to insufficient documentation, and if lease income from agricultural land qualifies as agricultural income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(1),Section 2(1A),Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri Krishnakantha, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Dept
Hearing: 06.05.2026Pronounced: 21.05.2026

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The present appeal has been instituted by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Act dated 08.12.2025 relevant to AY 2020-21. 2. The effective issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of agricultural income 28,12,700. 00. The facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual who filed return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 declaring total income of Rs. 2,80,580/- and agricultural income of Rs. 28,12,700/- only. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the specific reason of substantial increase in agricultural income as

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 10(1)

All 388 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →