Loading judgment…
Facts
A search operation uncovered incriminating documents related to the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) made several additions to the income, including Rs. 1,83,000/- for agricultural income. The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 1,83,000/-, holding that the assessee had provided evidence of land ownership and use for agricultural purposes, and this addition was not linked to seized documents.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had correctly deleted the addition of Rs. 1,83,000/- as the assessee had submitted sufficient evidence of land ownership and agricultural use. The revenue failed to provide any contrary evidence to support its grounds of appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made by the AO on account of agricultural income, without substantiating it with requisite evidence, was justified, especially when the assessee provided evidence of land ownership and agricultural use.
Sections Cited
132, 153A, 143(3), 250, 271, 274, 127, 139(1), 143(2), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, DELHI
Before: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
The appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is against the order dated 31.07.2018 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31,
P a g e | Dheeraj Chaudhary (AY 2011-12) New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), arising out of order dated 27.12.2016 of the Ld. Assessing Officer/ACIT Central Circle-8, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. AO”), u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2011-12.
Brief facts of the case are that, assessee filed return of income on 31.03.2013 declaring total income of Rs. 4,03,908/. The assessee had shown profit and gain from business at Rs.5,14,957/- from turnover of Rs. 23,63,712/-, income from other sources at Rs. 3951/- and agricultural income of Rs. 1,83,000/-. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on Karan Luthra group of assessees on 14.03.2014. Some incriminating documents/ information related to the assessee were found and seized. The case of the assessee was centralised with Central Circle-8 New Delhi, vide order dated 19.08.2015, passed by the Pr. CIT, Delhi-11, New Delhi u/s 127 of the Act. Notice u/s 153A of the Act dated 28.08.2015 was issued, assessee failed to make compliance. Notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act dated 20.07.2016 was issued. Assessee filed letter dated 22.08.2016 and return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on P a g e | Dheeraj Chaudhary (AY 2011-12) 23.08.2016. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued on 07.09.2016. Sh. B.B. Chaudhary, AR, attended proceedings and furnished documents.
On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 27.12.2016 made additions of Rs.31,52,500/-, Rs.1,01,00,000/-, Rs.7,75,557/-, Rs.3,85,495/- and Rs.1,83,000/-.
Against order dated 27.12.2016 of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was partly allowed vide order dated 31.07.2018. Addition of Rs.1,83,000/- was deleted.
Being aggrieved, appellant-Department of Revenue preferred present appeal on following grounds of appeal:-
1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts.
2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,83,000/- made by Assessing Officer on account of non submission of requisite evidences to substantiate claim of earning income from agricultural activities.
The appellant craves for leave to add, amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal
P a g e | Dheeraj Chaudhary (AY 2011-12) 6. Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that, Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,83,000/- made by Ld. AO on account of non- submission of requisite evidences regarding claim of agricultural income.
Ld. Authorized Representative for respondent-assessee submitted that, evidences of ownership of land, use of land for agricultural purposes were submitted.
From examination of record, in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that, Ld. CIT(A) in para No.11.2 observed as under:-
11.2. The appellant submitted evidence of ownership of land, evidence of land actually having been used for purposes of agriculture, and copy of records from the land revenue authority. Besides, the appellant has taken a legal ground that this addition does not relate to incriminating documents seized/found. As such there is no basis for AO's action. In totality of circumstances, the addition of Rs. 1,83,000/- is deleted. Ground no. 9 is adjudicated in favour of the appellant.
From perusal of above discussion, it is evident that assessee had submitted evidences regarding ownership of land and use of land for agricultural purposes. Relying on documents and non-action of Ld. AO was made basis for deleting addition of Rs.1,83,000/-.
In absence of any evidence to the contrary, in support of grounds of appeal by the revenue, the grounds of appeal are rejected.
P a g e | Dheeraj Chaudhary (AY 2011-12) 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09.04.2026