Sri Harjit Singh Sall, Kolkata V. I.T.O Wd - 50(3),kolkata., Kolkata

ITA 1237/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4893 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S M SURANA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: KOL KATA [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANES H, AM] I.T.A NO.1237/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SRI HARJIT SINGH SALL VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-50(3), KOLKATA (PAN: AKOPS6684E) ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 02.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04.05.2016 FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI S. M. SURANA, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL. CI T, SR. DR ORDER PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA VIDE APPEAL NO. 102/CIT(A)-XXXII/50(3)/10-11/KOL DATED 21.06.20 12. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ITO, WD-50(3), KOLKATA U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 29 .12.2010. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTICED THAT THIS APPEAL I S TIME BARRED BY 217 DAYS AND ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONDONATION PETITION STATING REASONS SUPPORTE D BY AFFIDAVIT AND ALSO MEDICAL CERTIFICATE AND DISCHARGE SUMMARY FROM WOODLANDS HOSPITAL. LD. COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US STATED THAT THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WAS SERVED ON ASSESSEE ON 09.08.2012 AND APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE TRIBUNAL ON 08.10.2012. THIS APPEAL IS DELAYED BY 217 DAYS. THE REASONS STATED IN CONDONATION PETITION AND AFFIDAVIT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CRI TICALLY ILL FOR LAST TWO YEARS AND HAS UNDERGONE BY-PASS SURGERY AND ALSO ADMITTED TO ILS HOSPITAL I N THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2012. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM THE ASSESSEE ENCLOSED PRESCRIPTIONS OF THE ATTENDING DOCTORS, BILL FOR PURCHASE OF MEDICINES, VARIOUS MEDICAL TESTS UNDERGONE AS WELL AS DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE. WHEN THESE DOCUMENTS WERE CONFRONTED TO LD. SR. DR HE FAIRLY C ONCEDED THAT THE DELAY CAN BE CONDONED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT T HE APPEAL. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY AO TREATING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOM E AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AMOUNTING TO RS.15,40,370/-. 2 ITA NO.1237/KOL/2013 HARJIT SINTH SALL, AY 2008-09 4. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT HE HAS EARNED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.15,40,370/- AND THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE DETAILS OF LAND HOLDING AND OTHER DETAILS IN S UPPORT OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT HE IS THE OWNER OF ONLY 5 ACRES OF LAN D IN WHICH HE HAS CO-OWNERSHIP WITH OTHERS AND SUBMITTED DETAILS. THE ASSESSEE SOLD FOLLOWING AGRICULTURE PRODUCE: I) SALES OF PADDY RS.8,50,486/- II) SALES OF WHEAT RS.9,34,318/- III) SALES OF SUGARCANE RS.1,76,542/- IV) SALE OF RICE RS.7,86,550/- RS.27,47,896/- ACCORDING TO AO, ON SUCH A SMALL HOLDING OF AGRICUL TURAL LAND THIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS NOT POSSIBLE AND ACCORDINGLY, HE TREATED THIS AGRICULTU RAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ADDED TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGR IEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY STATING THAT T HE ASSESSEE FAILED TO GIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING CROP GROWN ON THE LAND I.E. GIRDAWARI RECORD OF CRO PS GROWN. ACCORDINGLY, HE CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF AO. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APP EAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE FIND FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS OWNER OF 5 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND IN HIS NATIVE VILLAGE BAINI DAROSA, TEHSIL RAI KOT, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB AND THE DETAILS OF LAND WERE GIVEN TO AO WHICH IS NOT DISPUTED. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE LAND IN PUNJAB IS VERY FERTILE WHERE INVARIABLY THREE CROPS ARE BEING TAKEN BY FARMERS. THE AO HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT SALE OR P URCHASE BEFORE HIM FOR VERIFICATION. AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN BY T HE ASSESSEE NOT POSSIBLE ON SUCH SMALL HOLDINGS OF LAND. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE CROPS PRODUCED THERE WERE PADDY, BEAT, RICE AND SUGAR CANE AND VEGETABLE AS B YE PRODUCTS. THE LAND IS IRRIGATED WITH THE IRRIGATION FACILITIES AND IS SITUATED IN RAIKOT, LU DHIANA. THE LAND WAS BEING IRRIGATED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH LOCAL LABOUR EMPLOYED. THE CROP IS BEING RECORDED BY THE LOCAL PATWARI WHICH THE AO COULD HAVE VERIFIED BY ISSUING SUMMONS. NO D OUBT THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT HAVING ANY DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THE SALE OF THE AGRICULTURAL PRO DUCE BUT THE EXTENT OF LAND ITSELF SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE EARNED AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM THE SAID L AND, DOING SO, WHEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND WAS ACCEPTED THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISPUTE OR DOUBT ABOUT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM THE SAID LAND. THERE IS THREE CORPS IN THE ENTIRE ONE YEAR PERIOD AND ACCORDINGLY, INCOME HAS TO BE ESTIMATED. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TH AT ONE CROP GIVES INCOME OF ROUGHLY AT RS. 5 3 ITA NO.1237/KOL/2013 HARJIT SINTH SALL, AY 2008-09 LAC AND FOR THREE CROP IT BECOMES RS.15 LAC. THE A SSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT HAS RIGHTLY DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.15,40,370/-. WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THAT THIS IS EXCESSIVE AGRICULTURE INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. BUT, THE AGRICULT URE INCOME CANNOT BE TAKEN AT NIL. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HOLDING AGRICULTURE L AND OF FIVE ACRES IN PUNJAB, THE INCOME OF THE ENTIRE YEAR CAN BE ESTIMATED AT RS.10 LAC. THE BALA NCE WILL BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLO WED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.05.201 6 SD/- SD/- (M. BALAGANESH) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 4 TH MAY, 2016 JD. (SR. P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT SHRI HARJIT SINGH SALL, CB, SECTOR-1, S ALT LAKE CITY, KOL-64 2. RESPONDENT- ITO, WD-50(3), KOLKATA. 3. CIT(A) , KOLKATA 4. CIT , KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR .