Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee declared agricultural income of Rs. 36,63,742/- for A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessing Officer, unsatisfied with the explanations and documentary evidence, added Rs. 46,87,512/- as gross agricultural income. The CIT(A) sustained this addition, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by sustaining the addition without properly considering the documents and evidences submitted by the assessee. Upholding principles of natural justice, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, directing the AO to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee and consider all submitted evidence.
Key Issues
The primary legal issue was whether the lower authorities were justified in making and sustaining an addition to agricultural income without providing proper opportunity and considering all evidences submitted by the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250, 143(2), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” PANAJI BENCH
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
Assessee by Shri.Saidappa Gadadi.AR Revenue by Shri.Madesh NM. Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 30.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2025 ORDER
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM:
The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A) panchkula passed u/sec 143(3) and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal
challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition of agriculture income made by the Assessing Officer.
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse has filed the return of income for A.Y.2016-17 on 20.10.2016 disclosing agricultural income of Rs.36,63,742/- and the case was selected for limited scrutiny under the CASS to 2025. Jambagi Laxman Siddappa HUF verify the claim of agricultural income. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has issued the notice u/sec143(2) and u/sec142(1) of the Act to furnish the details of income and the agricultural land holdings, expenditure and receipts. The assesse has filed the explanations and details mentioning the sources, expenses and particulars of sale of agricultural crops dealt at Para 4 & 5 of the order. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and doubted the earning of agricultural income in the absence proper documentary evidences and made addition of gross agriculture income of Rs.46,87,512/- and assessed the total income of Rs.46,87,732/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 11.12.2018.
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal
, statement of facts and findings of the AO but has sustained the action of the A.O and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR mentioned that the CIT(A) has not dealt on the details, documents, confirmation and evidences filed in the appellate proceedings to substantiate 2025. Jambagi Laxman Siddappa HUF the sale of agricultural crops and prayed for allowing the appeal. The Ld.AR supported the submissions with the factual paper book. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.AR that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition addition of agriculture income made by the Assessing Officer without providing proper opportunity and overlooking the facts and material evidences. The assesse has filed the details before the lower authorities and the CIT(A) has not considered the documents and information supporting the claim of the assesse. The Ld.AR highlighted on the submissions made in the proceedings and confirmation of parties placed at page 115 to 220 of the paper book to substantiate the earning of agriculture income and the assesee has a good case on merits. Prima- facie, the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and has not considered the submissions/evidences of the assesse filed in the proceedings referred and has not allowed the grounds of appeal. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing and accordingly restore the disputed issue along with the evidences for limited purpose to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification and examination and to adjudicate on merits and the assessing officer shall provide 2025. Jambagi Laxman Siddappa HUF adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the information. And the grounds of appeal
of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31/10/2025 as per rule 34(5) of the ITAT Rules 1963.