DEBASISH BANERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1),, KOLKATA

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated
04.04.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2020–21. 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being an individual filed return of income declaring total income at Rs.2,15,650/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued but the assessee failed to respond. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued show-cause notice and the assessee responded to the said notice stating that the assessee had taken 33.83 acres of agricultural land for rend from various land owners and the said land was then given to different cultivators for agricultural purposes. The Assessing Officer denied the agricultural
Debasish Banerjee

2
income of the assessee amounting to Rs.1,05,71,570/- as the Assessing
Officer observed that the income earned on subletting the agricultural land to the cultivators is in the nature of business income. The Assessing
Officer asked the assessee to produce the details of rent paid to the land owners and also bank statement, PAN details to whom the assessee paid rent. The assessee replied that the rents were paid to the land owners in cash and not through bank as they were all agriculturists and did not have any bank accounts, PAN or email ids. However, the Assessing
Officer denied the exemption claimed by the assessee as agricultural income of Rs.73,20,800/- treating the same as business income and also disallowed an expense of Rs.32,50,770/- incurred by the assessee by invoking section 40A(3) of the Act passing an assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee failed to substantiate his claim properly before the Assessing Officer, so instead of arguing on merits of the case, the assessee has only prayed that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh verification as the order passed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee has failed to file documentary evidences before the Assessing Officer.
5. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order.
6. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, we have perused the records and find that the Assessing Officer made the additions on account of non-submission of details/documents.
Debasish Banerjee

3
We also find that the assessee has submitted the following details before us:
1. copy of the lease deeds between the land owner(s) and the assessee
2. copy of the land records of the land owners along with the copy of the their Aadhar cards
3. copy of the agreement entered into between the assessee and the cultivators
4. copy of the Aadhar cards of the cultivators

[Pradip Kumar Choubey]
Accountant Member

Judicial Member

Dated: 16.10.2025. RS
Debasish Banerjee

4
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant -
2. Respondent -
3. CIT(A)-
4. CIT- ,

////
By order