MAGANBHAI BAHECHARBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(1), VADODARA

In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and in facts in dismissing the appeal and thereby upholding an addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- u/s 69A as unexplained money which as such is an agricultural income not liable to tax and which deserves to be deleted. Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2–

In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and in facts in treating the cash deposit of agricultural income of Rs.6,97,860/- already accepted by him as such as unexplained income liable to tax u/s 115BBE.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT (Appeals), NFAC has erred in fact and in law in not accepting concept of past savings out of agricultural income and hence, any addition out of past savings needs to be deleted entirely.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and in facts in levying penal interest u/s 234A of the Act and that it needs to be deleted.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and in facts in levying fees u/s 234F of the Act and that it needs to be deleted.

The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete and/or modify any or all grounds of this appeal.

At the outset, we find that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed summarily by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that, given an opportunity due compliances will be made before the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the matter is remanded to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication de-novo.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.