NIRAJ SHANKARLAL BHANUSHALI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(3)(2), MUMBAI

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 26.09.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National
Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Considering the reasons stated with duly sworn affidavit by the Assessee for condonation of delay in filing of instant appeal, the delay of 79 days is condoned.
3. The Assessee has claimed deduction of Rs. 15,36,000/- being exempt as agriculture income, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer (in short the “AO”) mainly doubting the cash
Shri Niraj Shankarlal Bhanushali

2
memo and presuming that cash memo should contain trade name, shop address, telephone number, email address, GST, VAT registration No.etc and consequently rejected the said cash memo.
4. The Ld. Commissioner also affirmed the said addition on the same footing/reasons as observed by the AO. Admittedly, the assessee had taken the loan vide sanction letter dated 30.07.2013
for agriculture activities and for development of horticulture through production and post harvest management of date and palm crop, for the period of 10 years and 3 years respectively. From the cash memo, page 29-58, it appears that the assessee has sold
(Pomegranate and Kesar mango) through bills containing numbers, date, purchaser name, pan no, quantity etc.
5. However, as observed above that the AO doubted the same mainly on the reasons that cash memo should contain trade name, shop address, telephone number, email address, GST etc. The Ld.
DR also submitted that the loan was taken for particular crop, however, there is no sale of dates/palm for which the loan was granted.
6. This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances related to this particular issue and observe that there cannot be any strait jacket formula for cultivating particular crop. There can be palm trees or date plantation along with the other trees/fruit trees/vegetable etc. in the unorganized business, specifically in the agricultural activities. Until and unless the legal requirement arises, VAT/GST registration no., email address, telephone No. etc are not mandatory and/or simply on the basis of that the activities in unorganized business/agriculture activities cannot be doubted. Even from the voucher/receipt as well as declaration, it clearly appears that there is purchase of old
Shri Niraj Shankarlal Bhanushali

3
bardanas and urea fertilizer, desi fertilizer or scrap bardana, go- mutra, desi chhana, water tanker etc. and therefore addition under consideration on the aforesaid facts and circumstances is hardly sustainable. However, to cut short the litigation and for substantial justice, as the Ld. counsel also agreed to, this Court is inclined to reduce the addition of Rs. 15,36,000/- to the extent of 25% and thus the addition @25% of Rs. 15,36,000/- is sustained and rest @
75% of the said amount is deleted.
7. Coming to the addition of Rs. 46,000/- on account of cash deposit, the assessee has filed duly sworn affidavit of his mother
Mrs. Annapurna Shankarlal Bhanusali, aged about 70 years qua this amount to support this amount. Thus the addition of Rs. 46,000/- is deleted.
8. Coming to the addition of Rs. 2,42,000/- on account of cash deposit in the bank account maintained with Indian overseas bank, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee has honestly conceded this particular addition, thus the addition is sustained.
9. This Court clarifies that adjudication of this issue involved in this case in particular manner, would not be any impediment in the other proceedings by the Revenue Authorities.
10. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.06.2025. (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY)

JUDICIAL MEMBER
Shri Niraj Shankarlal Bhanushali

4
* Disha Raut, Stenographer

Copy to: The Appellant
The Respondent
The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
The DR Concerned Bench

////

By Order

Dy/Asstt.