“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

Gurdit Singh, Patiala vs. ITO, W-4, Patiala

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1427/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1427/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 बनाम Gurdit Singh, The Ito, C/O Ca Ajay Kumar Jain Ward-4, Sco 80-81, 4Th Floor, Patiala Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Eazps7248H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, Ca (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

account of appellant without appreciating the fact that the appellant is agriculturist and having no other source of income except sale of agricultural land & agricultural income. 2. That the Id CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the action of assessing officer who framed the assessment without making enquiry from the buyers

Ghanshyambhai Nanalal Charandas, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1) (Previously Ward-3(3)(2)), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 298/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

Asst. Year 2015-16, assessee filed his Return of Income on 25-04-2016 declaring total income of Rs.6,31,710/- along with agricultural income of Rs.28,00,000/-. The return was taken for limited scrutiny assessment and assessment was completed on total income of Rs.1

Mettu Nagarathnamma, Bellary vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Ballari

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

ITA 2158/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Bhargavi S, Advocate

Section 148Section 250Section 69A

submits that, the learned CIT(A), ought to have appreciated that the entire amount to the extent of Rs 14,10,000/ -was an Agriculture Income the same was brought to the notice of the assessing authority that deposited amount of the appellant is genuine, but without considering the same ... circumstances of the case, the appellant submits that, the learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the appellant received all the money through Agriculture Income and same was deposited to Bank. Therefore, the assessing authority cannot say that it is unexplained Income and the same was confirmed

Jamuna Shankar Sharma, Guna vs. ITO, Guna

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

ITA 45/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 139Section 14Section 142(1)Section 144Section 154Section 250(6)

deleted. 2. That while sustaining the addition, the NFAC has completely ignored that the assessee has duly furnished all the supporting documents (earning of agriculture income, complete details of agriculture land, sale bills, complete details of agriculture produce and bills of expenses) in support of his submissions and grounds taken ... enjoying of agriculture income) which the NFAC has ignored, no addition is liable to be made, addition made by the AO, sustained by the NFAC is liable to be deleted. 2 | P a g e 3. That the learned NFAC has not passed the appellate order in accordance with

Saurya Urja Company of Rajasthan Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 965/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Rule 37BA Sl. No. 01 02 03 Particulars Total Receipts offered to tax under various head (including receipts under schedule El other than the agricultural income part) in the return Total receipts as per Form 26AS from various deductors (amounts appearing against TCS and 164N are not receipts, hence omitted

Shri Krishan Kumar Jalan, Bangalore vs. ITO, W-1, Sirsa

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

books maintained by the Assessee. The ITAT has recorded a finding that the source of funds for acquisition of the shares was the agricultural income which was duly offered and assessed to tax in those Assessment Years. The Assessee has produced certificates from the aforesaid four companies to the effect

Smt. Janakba Maheshdan Gadhvi, Gandhinagar vs. ITO, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 953/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

facts, in confirming the addition of Rs.27,67,834/- made as income from undisclosed sources, instead of accepting the same as agricultural income earned by the appellant and family members, completely ignoring the evidence on record furnished by the appellant. 3. That on facts, evidence on record ... entire addition ought to have been deleted and genuine agricultural income which is also duly verified u/s.133(6) of the Act ought to have been accepted as such.” ITA Nos.953/Ahd/2019 & 1101/Ahd/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2013-14 Smt. Janakba Maheshdan Gadhvi vs. ITO Page 2 of 5 3. Assessment Year

Smt. Janakba Maheshdan Gadhvi, Gandhinagar vs. ITO, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 1101/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Srinivasa Rao Bathini, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1182/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1181 & 1182/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Shri Srinivasa Rao Bathini Vs. Income Tax Officer Warangal Ward – 1 Pan:Abypb0978P Warangal (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghu Ram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghu Ram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 80C

creditworthiness of the loan creditors which is evident from the affidavits filed by the parties where 4 of them claims that they are having agricultural income and given loan in cash. Further, 2 remaining creditors claimed to have been engaged in the business, but no supporting evidences including ... persons, 4 persons Page 5 of 8 ITA Nos 1181 and 1182 of 2024 Srinivasa Rao Bathini claims to be agriculturists and derive agricultural income to explain loan given to the assessee. From the details filed by the assessee including the affidavits, we find that all of them have small

Srinivasa Rao Bathini, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1181/HYD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghu Ram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 80C

Ranbir Singh, Sangrur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Sunam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 981/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate on behalf of Shri Rishabh Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 69A

malafide intention on the part of the appellant to conceal any fact from the department, as he has no other source of income except agriculture income and as such he was not required to file income tax return. He is senior citizen aged about sixty years. The orders passed ... principal of natural justice to have been fairly given to the appellant. The appellant is an agriculturist and has no source of income except agriculture income. He along with his brother S. Hardev Singh has a joint bank account at Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited and has made various transactions

Balvant Nandlal Talaviya, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward-1, Navsari

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

ITA 531/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.530 & 531/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Balvant Nandlal Talaviya, Vs. The Ito, B-2/45, Sundaram Park Society, Hansot Ward – 1, Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch - 393001 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aedpt4075K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2025

Section 250Section 253(3)Section 50CSection 68

that assessee had filed his return of income for AY.2012-13 on 28.03.2013, declaring total income at Rs.3,29,780/-. The assessee had shown net agricultural income of Rs.2,00,000/-. The assessee with other five co-owners had sold immovable property for document value of Rs.1.12 Crore. However, the Stamp

Balvant Nandlal Talaviya, Bharuch vs. ITO Ward-1, Navsari

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

ITA 530/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Section 250Section 253(3)Section 50CSection 68

Narender Goud Tigulla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Mohd.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Kumaran, DR

Section 153ASection 269SSection 271D

cooperative bank etc. As per the second proviso, this provision would also not be applicable where both the depositor and the receiver are having agricultural income and neither of them has any income chargeable to tax under the Act. 18. Section 271D of the Act deals with penalty for failure

Rishi Raj Patel, Damoh vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Damoh, Damoh

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

ITA 147/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Rishi Raj Patel, Damoh V. Income Tax Officer, 1, Bakayan Village, Lukayan, Ward Damoh, Batiagarh, Mp-470661. Income Tax Office, Infront Of Jp School, Mp-470661. Pan:Bcgpp7457M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09 01 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 144

facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that assessee is an agricultural having sufficient agricultural land to earn agricultural income so as to keep opening cash in hand as on 08.11.2016 & to prove source of the cash deposition during demonetisation Page

Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 434/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.434/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel The Acit बनाम / V/S. Circle-3(3) 2, Parivar Society Part-2 Near Premchand Nagar Row-House, Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 380 015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Adrpp 8846 K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Dated 09/01/2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"] Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ao") Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2017-18.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

credit under Section 68 r.w.s.115BBE of the Act on the ground that no valid explanation or documentary evidence regarding the cash deposits was provided. Agricultural Income: 2. 2. The AO noted that the assessee declared agricultural income of Rs.36,88,500/- but failed to furnish details of landholding, sale bills ... maintained by Assessee. 3. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in upholding the addition of Rs.36,88,500 of Agricultural Income without considering various details regarding agricultural income including Form no 7/12, Sale Bills, Expenses Bills which were available with Ld. Respondent as well as Ld. Commissioner

ITO, Ward-1, Madikeri vs. Sri. M.L. Krupal, Kodagu

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 382/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2005-06 Late M.L. Krupal M/S. Prime Commodities Blv Complex Somwarpet 571 236 Represented By Legal Heir Suvina Krupal Ito Vs. C/O Shreehari Kutsa, Advocate Ward-1 No.2B, 2Nd Floor, ‘Solus’, Madikeri 1St Cross J.C. Road Bangalore 560 027

For Appellant: Smt. Harsha J., A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

account of additions in respect of these three creditors who appeared personally before the AO and confirmed to have agricultural income and also submitted agricultural land holding details in support of their claim. Therefore, the purchases made from these are not disputed and therefore, the addition on this account ... these three numbers of sundry creditors namely, B. M. Sannappa, B. L. Muttanna and B.M. Duddaiah appeared before the AO and confirmed to have agricultural income as well as agricultural land holdings. Further, Sri. B. M. Sannappa due to his old age could not remember the exact amount payable