Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
(Assessment Year: 2020-21) Sanjay Jayantibhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot Block No. 257, Palki Ward-1, National Highway No. 8, Gandhinagar Lawalpura, Dist. Gandhinagar, Gujarat-382321 [PAN : AIRPP 6262 G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri M.K. Patel, AR Respondent by: Adjournment application filed Date of Hearing 03.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2024 O R D E R
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT :
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 14.06.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.
The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(1) That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs.64,68,426/- made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of agricultural income.
Sanjay Jayantibhai Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2020-21 - 2– (2) That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC ought to have considered and accepted the fact that the agricultural income was shown by mistake and bonafide Rs. 64,68,426/- instead agricultural income of error of of CA at the correct Rs.20,00,000/- as explained in appellate proceedings.”
The Revenue filed adjournment.
In this case, the issue pertains to examination of agricultural income of Rs.64,68,426/- filed by the assessee in the return of income which the assessee later claimed as Rs.20,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer passed an order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, making addition of 64,68,426/- u/s 68 of the Act. We find that the factum of “generation of agricultural income” needs to be examined which the Revenue Authorities have not gone in for. The ld. Counsel pleaded that he has all the evidences to support to the earning of agricultural income and the bank statements to substantiate the amended agricultural income. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter to the Assessing Officer to examine the “Agricultural Operations undertaken by the assessee and the Generation of agricultural income”.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.