← All Phrases

“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
98
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
98
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

Prem Trading Co, Kalanwali vs. Income Tax Officer, Sirsa

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 483/CHANDI/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Dec 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 483/Chd/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2023-24 बनाम Prem Trading Co., Income Tax Officer 16, Nai Mandi, Kalanwali, Sirsa Haryana 125201 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aahfp 2628Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent (Physical Hearing) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Ms. Ashisha Mittal, C.A. राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2024 आदेश/Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-5, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Raised The Followings Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 194HSection 194Q

farmers, being illiterate persons, insist for total payment. He has further submitted that the buyer was not supposed to deduct TDS on the agricultural income, however, he has deducted the same and the thus the assessee is entitled to claim the same as the assessee has passed on the entire

Mangat Ram, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 481/CHANDI/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. Nos. 480 & 481/Chd/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 बनाम Mangat Ram Vpo Jaroda, Income Tax Officer Teh. Jagadhari, Ward 5, Yamunanagar Yamunanagar, Haryana 135003 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Bqlpr 0570C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent (Virtual Hearing) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, C.A. राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2024 आदेश/Order Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessees Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 29.02.2024 & 20.09.2023 Respectively For The Assessment Year: 2007-08. Ita No. 480/Chd/2024 Is Relating To The Quantum Additions, Whereas, Ita No. 481/Chd/2024 Is Relating To The

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 271(1)(c)

received of 12.15 lacs. He has further submitted that the assessee being the agriculturist, and the remaining amount of Rs.1.96 lacs was out of agricultural income of the assessee. 5. The ld. DR, however, has submitted that since the assessee could not explain the source of deposits of Rs.3.74 lacs ... Rs.1.96 lacs is concerned, considering the smallness of the amount, it can be well assumed that the said amount was out of the agricultural income of the assessee. In view of this, the impugned addition made by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable and the same is ordered

Mangat Ram, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 480/CHANDI/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. Nos. 480 & 481/Chd/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 बनाम Mangat Ram Vpo Jaroda, Income Tax Officer Teh. Jagadhari, Ward 5, Yamunanagar Yamunanagar, Haryana 135003 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Bqlpr 0570C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent (Virtual Hearing) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, C.A. राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2024 आदेश/Order Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessees Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 29.02.2024 & 20.09.2023 Respectively For The Assessment Year: 2007-08. Ita No. 480/Chd/2024 Is Relating To The Quantum Additions, Whereas, Ita No. 481/Chd/2024 Is Relating To The

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 271(1)(c)

received of 12.15 lacs. He has further submitted that the assessee being the agriculturist, and the remaining amount of Rs.1.96 lacs was out of agricultural income of the assessee. 5. The ld. DR, however, has submitted that since the assessee could not explain the source of deposits of Rs.3.74 lacs ... Rs.1.96 lacs is concerned, considering the smallness of the amount, it can be well assumed that the said amount was out of the agricultural income of the assessee. In view of this, the impugned addition made by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable and the same is ordered

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1043/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

this common order for the sake of convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred ... firm engaged in agricultural activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1042/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

this common order for the sake of convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred ... firm engaged in agricultural activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment

Axis Agri Services, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1041/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

this common order for the sake of convenience. The primary point of dispute across all the assessment years relates to the treatment of agricultural income claimed as exempt under section 10(1) of the Act, which was subjected to scrutiny and additions by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred ... firm engaged in agricultural activities, specifically growing hybrid seeds for BT cotton. In each year under consideration, the assessee declared NIL income, claiming exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) of the Act. The cases were selected for scrutiny due to large agricultural income flagged either under the Thematic Assessment

Debabrata Paul, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2095/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2095/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Debabrata Paul……….… ……….. ……..……………………....Appellant 5, Bhupen Bose Avenue, Kolkata – 700004. [Pan: Aeypp0909B] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(1), Kolkata…. ….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Gautam Chatterjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Susanta Saha & Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 06, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.08.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2020-21 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,83,955/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny In Order To Verify The Agricultural Income Claimed By The Assessee. A Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued & In Response To That Notice, The Assessee Submitted His Reply Before The Assessing Officer. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Observed That Rs.44,80,000/- Was Received By The Assessee Which Was Claimed As Exempt Income Purportedly From Sale Of The Agricultural Land. The Assessing Officer However Treated This Amount As

Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 50C(2)

declaring a total income of Rs.1,83,955/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny in order to verify the agricultural income claimed by the assessee. A notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued and in response to that notice, the assessee submitted his reply before