Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH “C”, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM]
1. This appeal of the revenue arise out of the order of the Learned CIT(A) in Appeal No. 198/CIT(A)-VI/07-08/6(4) dated 06/05.2009 for the Asst Year 2004-05 passed against the order of assessment framed by the Learned AO u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri.Sanjay Mukherjee , JCIT, the Learned DR argued on behalf of the revenue.
3. The issue to be decided in this appeal is that whether the Learned AO is justified in treating the agricultural income declared by the assessee as taxable income in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. The brief facts of this appeal is that the assessee filed its return for the Asst Year 2004-05 disclosing total income of Rs Nil due to claim of exemption u/s 10 for the agricultural income derived by it. The Learned AO tried to serve the various statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act on various dates but could not serve the same
2 M/s. Biswas Agro Ltd. A.Yrs.2004-05 & 2005-06 on the assessee. The Learned AO found from the accounts filed along with the return that the assessee had 100.39 bighas of land for cultivation for agricultural purposes purchased at Rs. 3,92,000/-. Based on the report received from the Inspector of Income Tax for non service of notices, the Learned AO proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 / 145(3) of the Act by treating the profit declared in the profit and loss account (which admittedly represents agricultural income) as income from other sources . The Learned AO however found that the value of land disclosed at Rs. 3,92,000/- is too low for accounting for 100.39 bighas and treating the same as not reliable , he worked out the extent of land at 7.84 bighas based on the estimated rate of Rs. 50,000/- per bigha. The Learned AO however accepted the agricultural income of Rs. 78,400/- ( 7.84 bighas for cultivation calculated @ Rs 10000 per bigha) as against 100.39 bighas held by the assessee in different districts of West Bengal. On first appeal, the Learned CIT(A) accepted the extent of land at 100.39 bighas but restricted the agricultural income at Rs. 20,000/- per bigha and determined the agricultural income at Rs. 20,07,800 (100.39 * 20000) as against Rs. 78,400/- accepted by the Learned AO and upheld the balance addition made by the Learned AO. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us .
The Learned DR argued that the assessee had neither participated in the assessment nor in the appellate proceedings. Even before this tribunal, the assessee had not bothered to represent its case and the assessments were completed u/s 144 after taking due efforts for service of notice through the Inspector of Income Tax. Accordingly he pleaded for restoration of the order of the Learned AO.
We have heard the Learned DR. We find from the records that the assessee was in receipt of agricultural income and had claimed exemption u/s 10 of the Act and filed Rs Nil income in its return. Admittedly, the statutory notices could not be served on the assessee during the assessment and first appellate proceedings. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case and accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, to set aside this issue to the file of the Learned AO to make
3 M/s. Biswas Agro Ltd. A.Yrs.2004-05 & 2005-06 denovo adjudication of the entire issues uninfluenced by earlier decisions and reframe the assessment afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly , the grounds raised by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.
/ 2009 – Asst Year 2005-06
This appeal of the revenue arise out of the order of the Learned CITA in Appeal No.317/CIT(A)-VI/07-08/KOL dated 06.05.2009 for the Asst Year 2005-06 passed against the order of assessment framed by the Learned AO u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
2. The revenue had raised the following grounds before us:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,52,800/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of ‘Filing Fee ‘ for increasing the authorized capital, without considering the fact that the same is capital in nature.
2. That, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in considering that the assessee owns 210.89 bighas of land instead of 38.90 bighas of land without asking for the ownership of land.
3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in not considering the fact that the assessee never complied with the requirements of Section 142(1) to prove the genuineness of agricultural income.
4. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in determining the agricultural income of the assessee at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per bigha of land instead of Rs.10,000/- per bigha of land as made by the Assessing officer, without any basis.
5. That the appellant craves for leave to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”
One of the issue involved in this appeal is identical to an issue raised in the appeal for the Asst Year 2004-05. Apart from this , there are other issues in Asst Year 2005- 06.
We have heard the Learned DR and in for Asst Year 2004-05 above, we had directed the Learned AO to reframe the entire assessment afresh in accordance with law uninfluenced by earlier decisions and make denovo adjudication of the entire issues. The same direction would be applicable for this assessment year In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No. 1479 / 2009 and 1480 / 2009 are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the court on 6.10.2015.