SHRI. P JANAKIRAMAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 7 (1), CHENNAI

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai, dated 31.01.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

The only issue arises for consideration is disallowance of the claim of agricultural income.

Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the assessee claimed a sum of ₹6,00,000/- as income from agriculture. According to the Ld. counsel, the assessee, in fact, produced copies of Adangal and Chitta extracts with regard to cultivation, before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer, however, observed in the assessment order that such documents were not filed before him. The Assessing Officer accordingly treated the income disclosed by the assessee as “income from other sources” instead of income from agricultural income. Referring to the Adangal extract, which is available at page 90 of the paper-book, the Ld.counsel submitted that the assessee is owning about 10 acres of land and is cultivating casuarina trees. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in treating the income under the head “income from other sources”.

On the contrary, Shri V. Nandakumar, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the Assessing Officer specifically observed that the Chitta and Adangal extracts were not filed before him. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer found that what was disclosed by the assessee was income from other sources and not income from agriculture.

We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee has now produced copies of Chitta and Adangal extracts which show cultivation of casuarina trees. The Assessing Officer and the CIT(Appeals) claim that the same were not produced before them.

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