“agricultural income”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(1A) / Rule 7, 7A, 7B(1), 7B(1A), 82,868 judgments

The decision most relied on for agricultural income is CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) (315 ITR 1), cited in 363 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on agricultural income

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court

363

citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.

389 ITR 68 · 2016 · High Court

192

citing judgments

Income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to its core activities and therefore not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

414 ITR 67 · 2019 · High Court

190

citing judgments

The Full Bench of the Kerala High Court held that a co-operative bank or society is not entitled to a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act if it provides loans to non-members. This decision was subsequently overruled by the Supreme Court.

Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO

298 ITR 349 · 2008 · High Court

187

citing judgments

Cash receipts from customers against genuine delivery of goods or services cannot be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The case also provides guidance on non-disallowance under Section 40A(3) for business payments made in specific contexts like agricultural markets.

Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. v. Assessing Officer

154 Taxmann.com 305 · 2023 · Supreme Court

136

citing judgments

Section 80P(4) is not applicable to a cooperative bank unless it is classified as a 'bank' under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. For cooperative banks not meeting this definition, the deduction for interest earned from investments in cooperative societies is available under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy

32 ITR 466 · 1957 · Supreme Court

132

citing judgments

Income is considered agricultural income, exempt under Section 10(1), only if the land undergoes a measure of cultivation involving basic primary operations prior to germination and subsequent post-germination activities requiring human skill and labour.

Sabarkhanta Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. v. ClT

203 ITR 1027 · 1993 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Co-operative societies or banks engaged in both agricultural and non-agricultural activities are entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, limited only to the profits derived from agricultural activities, not 100% of their gross profits.

CIT v. Usha Stud Agricultural Farms Ltd.

301 ITR 384 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

An addition cannot be made under Section 68 for cash credits if it is established that the credits do not pertain to the impugned assessment year but relate to earlier assessment years.

Judgments citing agricultural income

Kaushik D Bhagat (Patel), Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI T. R SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)Section 69A

Page No 3 contacted the AO regarding the said notices and explained to him that he being a farmer had earned agricultural income during the year under consideration and the receipts from such agricultural activities had been deposited by him in his bank account. It was then the AO asked ... assessee to furnish the bills of agricultural income and also of the agricultural expenditure incurred to earn the said income, for which the assessee requested certain time. In the mean time assessee had been diagnosed with dengue and had been hospitalized in the hospital for a week and upon

Shailesh Kumar Ishwarbhai Patel, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Anand

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

ITA 2015/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2015/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) बनाम/ Shailesh Kumar The Ito Ishwarbhai Patel Ward 1, Anand Vs. Gandhi Pole, Vaherakhadi, Anand, Gujarat - 388365 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Auhpp1709Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Arti Shah, Ar. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr 17/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 25/04/2025 O R D E R The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) Dated 30.09.2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013- 14. 2. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal By The Assessee Are As Under:

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

ancestral agricultural land and did not carry out any business activity and the cash deposits in his bank account was attributable to his agricultural income and his savings therefrom. It was pointed out that the summary of the cash flow during the year had been submitted to the AO accompanied

Yeshwanth Kumar, Hosur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Hosur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 533/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Anandd Babunath, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)

scrutiny through CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that in the previous years the assessee has declared large increase in agricultural income. Therefore, the AO issued several notices / show-cause notices to the assessee in order to verify substantial increase in 2 agricultural income ... respond to the same. Hence, the AO completed the assessment and made addition of Rs.97,37,913/- on best judgement basis on account of agricultural income. 3. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who dismissed

Karuppannan Kulandaivel, Karungaradu, Salem vs. Income Tax Officer - ITO Ward 1(8), Salem

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

ITA 371/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.371/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs Shri Karuppannan Kulandaivel, The Income Tax Officer, 2/4-898, Karungaradu, Ito Ward 1(8), Navapatty (Po), Mettur Taluk, Salem. Salem – 636 452. Pan : Anwpk 1060F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Srivatsan Ranganathan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Keerthi Narayanan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per S R Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 26.12.2024 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Has Not Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011- 12. As Per Information, The Assessee Has Transactions In His Savings

For Appellant: Shri Srivatsan Ranganathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT

Section 144Section 148Section 69A

absence from India. Before CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the cash deposits were out of sale proceeds of agricultural properties and agricultural incomes. However, the Ld.CIT(A) rejected the claim of assessee stating that no documentary evidences were filed. Since the assessee could not attend the notices issued

Sudhir Kumar Jha, Bokaro Steel City vs. ACIT Or DCIT, Circle-3, Bokaro

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 131/RAN/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. DR

Section 250

Shri Sunil Kumar Jha. When questioned, the assessee submitted that the amount was received from the brother out of the sale of land and agricultural income over a period of time spanning more than a decade. The assessee had also submitted a certificate dated 03.11.2019 from Shri Sunil Kumar ... CONCERN 2 to Rs. 3500000 tion documents thousand ) from si. 2.13.14 of enclosed Annexure-1 payments were rect registry was done on 19.12.2016 agricultural income, does not return. Copy of PAN © ‘ in village Bardaha from We and total ancome excluding net exemption mit for filng Land ownersmp cer house

M/S. Sarju Vitrified Pvt. Ltd., Morbi-363641 vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

ITA 83/RJT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 68o

read this table and details given therein carefully, we will find that apart from the taxable income and agriculture income, many of the lender such as serial no-3,4,6,7 and 9 has generated huge funds from sale of shares, property and by way of secured loan from ... confirmation of the account, the relevant part of the bank statement, showing the transaction and in case of non-filers, the land proof for agricultural income along with their ID proof and bank statements. This fact is not disputed by the ld. PCIT in the order u/s 263. These documents

Labhuben Manubhai Mangukiya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(5), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 773/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.773/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Labhuben Manubhai Mangukiya. Vs. The Ito, 24, Ramkrishna Society, L.H. Road, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat - 395006 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aczpm1695G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 68

case in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 22.02.2018 for AY.2017-18, declaring total income of Rs.2,03,220/- and agricultural income of Rs.86,300/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny on the issue of “Large value cash deposits during demonetization period as compared to returned

Datta Jayaram Garad, Gadhanpura, Dist. Beed vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2727/PUN/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2727/Pun/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Vs Ito, Ward- Datta Jayaram Garad, Near Municipal 1(5), Corporation, Main Road, Aurangabad Gadhanpura, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed- 431131 Maharashtra Pan-Aphpg1705Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

property in which the assessee received Rs. 35,00,000/- in cash and remaining amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was paid out of agricultural income. Assessee also filed additional evidence for which remand report was called for by Ld. CIT(A). However assessee failed to succeed ... addition of Rs.40,00,000/- the assessee has contended that the said amount was accumulated from the sale of agricultural land and from the agricultural income from which he purchased property. However, the assessee has failed to furnish any relevant documentary evidence against such claim. 6.2.3 I have perused

Pomona Farms & Products, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 34, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1940/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhumita Das, DR

Section 143(3)

against the confirmation of addition of ₹23,59,540/- by ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on account of bogus agricultural income. 06. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 23.03.2018, declaring total income at ₹ nil while claiming that ... agricultural income of ₹23,59,540/- as exempt. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, the statutory notices along with questionnaire were issued and were also replied by the assessee. The assessee is owner of agricultural land qua which the evidences were placed before

Pomona Farms & Products, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 34, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1939/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)

against the confirmation of addition of *23,59,540/- by ld. CIT (A) as made by the Id. AO on account of bogus agricultural income. 06. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 23.03.2018, declaring total income at * nil while claiming that ... agricultural income of ₹23,59,540/- as exempt. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, the statutory notices along with questionnaire were issued and were also replied by the assessee. The assessee is owner of agricultural land qua which the evidences were placed before

Siddharth Singh, Tota Ka Tal Agra vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(4) Agra Shri Mahesh Chand Sharma, Aayakar Bhawan Agra

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 283/AGR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 283/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 2. S.A. No. 02/Agr/2024 (In Ita No. 283/Agr/2024) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Siddharth Singh Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ Vill & Post- Nasirpur Ward 1(2)(4), Agra. Vs. Hathras (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bjmps-1593-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Dushyant Asthana (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 29-05-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 144 Of The Act On 17-12-2019. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Of Net Cash Deposit For Rs.10.04 Lacs For Want Of Any Satisfactory Explanation From The Assessee. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Assessment For The Same Very Reasons. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 11 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned.

For Appellant: Sh. Dushyant Asthana (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 144

advanced arguments to submit that the assessee is having sufficient agricultural land holdings and the cash deposits were sourced out of agricultural income. The Ld. AR drew attention to various documents i.e., Khatoni, land revenue bill, Kisan Bahi etc. in support of its submissions. Upon perusal of the same

Sh. Bramhjit Singh S/O Sh.Dharam Pal Singh, Morena vs. ITO., Ward-1, Morena

The appeals stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 324/AGR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.323/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.324/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) Shri Bramhajit Singh Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ Vill. Jareerua, Post- Nurabad, Ward 1, Morena. Vs. Morena (Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Atxpb-1047-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR

Section 147Section 154Section 234A

Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that Ld. CIT(A) has granted relief of Rs.2.93 Lacs for past savings and agricultural income. From assessee’s submissions, it would appear that the assessee has sold certain agricultural land along with other family members and deposited the proceeds thereof ... assessee has claimed that amount of Rs.5 Lacs was sourced from past savings and Rs.25 Lacs is stated to be sourced from accumulated agricultural income of family members. Considering all these facts and with a view to settle prolonged litigation, we confirm impugned addition to the extent of Rs.5 Lacs

Sh. Bramhajit Singh, Morena vs. ITO., Ward-1, Morena

The appeals stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 323/AGR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR

Section 147Section 154Section 234A

Sh. Sridhar Pandey, Auraiya vs. A.C.I.T.-2, Agra

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 492/AGR/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.492/Agr/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Shri Sridhar Pandey Acit-2, बनाम/ S/O Late Sh. Babu Ram Pandey Agra Vs. Muradganj, Distt. Auriya (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aljpp-4364-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2003-04 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Agra [Cit(A)] On 31-03-2012 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 153A Of The Act On 06-12-2006. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Accordingly, The Appeal Was Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Dismissal Of The Appeal. 2. From Case Records, It Could Be Ascertained That The Assessee Was Subjected To Search U/S 132 On 03-03-2005 & Notice U/S 153A Was Issued On 24-01-2006. The Assessee Initially Filed Return Of Income On 30- 03-2005 I.E., Before Issuance Of Notice U/S 153A. In Response To Notice U/S 153A, The Assessee Offered The Same Income. The Ld. Ao, After Rejecting

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153A

assessee offered the same income. The Ld. AO, after rejecting assessee’s various submissions, assessed total income at Rs.72.50 Lacs. While doing so, the agricultural income of Rs.3.60 Lacs was treated as income from undisclosed sources. The Ld. AO made addition of peak of bank deposits and also made addition

Jashubhai Manjibhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1, Bardoli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 845/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bijayananda Pruseth & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.845/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Jashubhai Manjibhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, 84, Sainath Society, At-Maandavi Ward - 1, Ta-Mandavi, Surat-394160 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amppp2266C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Dalzin Madan, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/04/2025

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 253(3)Section 271A

were issued and served upon the assessee. In response, the assessee submitted copy of 7/12, copy of agriculture income certificate, ledger copy of agriculture income and expenses and copy of bank statement. The Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) also found that during the demonetization period there was cash deposit ... assessee filed reply on 08.12.2023 wherein he contended that sources of cash deposit were cash withdrawals, opening balance of cash, agricultural income and income from JCB job work. The CIT(A) considered submission of the assessee and the ITA No.845/SRT/2024/AY.2017-18 Jashubhai M Patel assessment order and observed that the cash

Gulubhai Mahendrabhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward-5(3)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 923/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 263Section 69

assessee’s explanation of the source of investment was that it was sourced out of his income from his business of contractor and his agricultural income. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that this fact was pointed out both ... with me on account of my business receipts which was offered for tax u/s.44AD. Over and above my business income I disclosed Rs.1100908/- as agricultural income. Thus total cash available with me as on 10/06/12 was Rs292902/- 6. Thus there was enough cash available with me for acquisition of agricultural

Rameshbhai Popatbhai Chaudhari, Mehsana vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Mehsana

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1961/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rushin Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 5Section 69A

assessee on account of cash deposit in the bank account remaining unexplained. The assessee had attributed cash as being sourced from his agricultural income and also income earned as a contractor of labour supplier, both of which were rejected by the authorities below in the absence of any substantiation ... same with evidence and holding it to be a fabricated story. I have noted the assessee’s explanation of the source of cash being agricultural income was duly substantiated with copies of bills of sale of agricultural produce. But this evidence was rejected and dismissed as having no evidentiary value

Gulabnabi Samratbhai Tank, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1452/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

however, reduced the addition to Rs. 14,10,500/- treating the balance amount of Rs. 3,28,000/- to have been sourced from the agricultural income earned by the assessee. Before us, the assessee is agitating the addition confirmed ... authorities below. Admittedly and undisputedly the explanation of the assessee regarding the source of such cash deposited in the bank account was his agricultural income and the addition was made and partly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non- substantiation of the same to the satisfaction

Govardhan Naidu Chintakunta, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward - 1, Proddutur

ITA 435/HYD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Y. Srikanth Reddy, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271A

filed his return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 on 07-03-2012, declaring an income of Rs.2,43,360/- and agricultural income of Rs.3,12,540/-. The A.O. thereafter, framed the assessment vide his order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 25-03-2013 determining ... total income at Rs.39,19,178/-, including agricultural income of Rs. 3,12,540/- after making certain additions, viz., (i) Capital gain from sale of immovable property: Rs.13,73,303/-; (ii) Unexplained cash found from the assessee’s residential premises during the course of search proceedings

Harinath Reddy Devireddy, Hyderbad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

ITA 321/HYD/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234A

Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income for AY 2013-14 declaring an income of Rs.2,12,150/- along with agricultural income of Rs.3,26,980/- 4. The A.O. based on information that the assessee had though during the subject year sold two immovable properties