Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a private limited company involved in agricultural activities, claimed exempt agricultural income of ₹89,78,685/- for AY 2018-19. The assessing officer restricted this claim and added the unsubstantiated portion to income under 'Income from Other Sources' due to lack of evidence, a decision upheld by the Ld. NFAC.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Ld. NFAC for a de-novo verification. This was based on the assessee's claim of having submitted a paper-book with evidence to the lower authorities, for which no acknowledgement of submission was on record.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of unsubstantiated exempt agricultural income under Section 56(2) was justified when the assessee claims to have submitted supporting evidence to the lower authorities.
Sections Cited
Income-tax Act, 1961 Sections 250, 143(3), 56(2), ITAT-Rules, 1963 Rules 18, 34
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI
Assessment Year : 2018-19 Krishna Plantation Private Limited 15/1452, Nanu House, Varde Valaulikar Rd., Madgao, Goa PAN : AAACK6885G . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Madgao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Smt Bhavya Goyal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 20/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 01/04/2025 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; The captioned appeal of the assessee impugns DIN & Order 1062943051(1) dt. 23/04/2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. NFAC’ hereinafter] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of assessment dt. 29/01/2021 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the National Faceless e-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. AO’ hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter].
ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 3
Krishna Plantation Private Limited Vs ITO AY: 2018-19 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; the assessee is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 with the object of engaging into agricultural activities, animal husbandry and forestry activities. For the year under consideration the assessee filed its return on 11/01/2019 declaring total income of ₹NIL with a claim for exempt agricultural income of ₹89,78,685/-. The return of income was selected for scrutiny and consequential assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act wherein the claim of exempt agricultural income was restricted to ₹3,39,540/- and for assessee’s failure to substantiate true nature & source of declared exempt agricultural income of ₹89,78,685/- was added to total income under the head Income from Other Sources.
Aggrieved assessee attempted to resolve the dispute in first appeal before the Ld. NFAC, who in the absence of forceful evidences dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved by impugned order, the assessee came in present appeals on the sole & substantive aground against the addition made u/s 56(2) of the Act.
ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 3 the rival party’s submission on limited issue and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused material placed on record, and we note that, when exempt agricultural income claimed in the return of income remained unsupported by persuasive evidences, the tax authorities below brought the same to tax. The appellant submitted a paper-book containing evidences (Pg 87-268) with a claim that those were before the tax authorities below. In the absence of acknowledgement copy of their submission we see strong force in rival party’s request for remanding the matter back for verification in the light of audited accounts. In view thereof without offering our comment we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. NFAC with a direction to deal with income from other source brought to tax de-novo in accordance with law.
The appeal in result stands allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 the order pronounced in the open court on date mentioned herein before.