What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the assessee's contention that documentary evidence was presented to the CIT(A) to support the agricultural income claim. The CIT(A) had made observations regarding this income.

The assessee claimed agricultural income of Rs. 26,40,597/- from the sale and supply of sugarcane seeds. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim for lack of evidence, treating it as income from other sources. The CIT(A) upheld this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of agricultural income without properly considering the documentary evidence presented by the assessee.

Smt. Asha Manjari Mishra… vs DCIT | s.143(3) | ITAT Cuttack 2018

2 ITA No .250/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 201 3 of assessment proceedings, on verification of statement of total income,

the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has shown net

agricultural income of Rs.26,40,597/-. Before the Assessing Officer, it

was submitted that the agricultural income of Rs.26,40,597/- is from sale

and supply of seeds of sugar cane. To support its claim, the assessee

submitted agreement with Nayagarh Sugar Complex Ltd., for supply of

sugar cane to the registered farmers of the company. The Assessing

Officer required the assessee to furnish the evidence of land holding, land

used for agricultural purposes, expenditure involved and subsequent

operation and sale of agricultural products. Since, the assessee could not

produce the required documents despite several opportunity, except

agreement with Nayagarh Sugar Complex Ltd., the Assessing Officer

completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act determining the total

income at Rs.55,85,900/-, inter alia, treating Rs.26,40,597/- as income

from other sources.

On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer.

We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower

authorities and materials available on record. The contention of ld A.R.

that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the

Assessing Officer in respect of agricultural income and further pleaded

that the assessee has filed documentary evidence to support her case

regarding the receipt of agricultural income before the CIT(A) and the

CIT(A) having accepted the agricultural income and made observation in

4 ITA No .250/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 201 3 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)- 4. Pr.CIT- 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,

SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack

SMT. ASHA MANJARI MISHRA,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1), BHUBANESWAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments