ACIT, CHENNAI V. Shri Devaraj Anandaraj, CHENNAI

ITA 1297/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 129721714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A.NO.1297/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX BUSINESS CIRCLE III CHENNAI VS SHRI DEVARAJ ANANDARAJ NO.17, P.T.RAJAN SALAI K.K.NAGAR CHENNAI - 78 [PAN ABGPA 3200 K ] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 05-12-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05-12-2013 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR2007- 08, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-VIII,CHENNAI, DATED 28.3.2012, PASSED IN APPEAL NO.128/09- 10(A)-VIII, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION143(3) OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). I.T.A.NO1297/12. :- 2 -: 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING, ONLY ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF ` 7,40,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2009. 3. THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT( A) DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN CONSTRU CTION ACTIVITIES. ON 29.3.2008, HE HAD FILED HIS RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 15,11,343/- WHICH WAS SUMMARILY PROCESSED. 5. IN THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ` 7,40,000/-. IN ASSESSING OFFICERS VIEW, NO SUCH INCOME HAD BEEN S HOWN IN THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNTS AND HE HAD ALSO NOT PRODUCED AN Y EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES PERFORMED. THER EFORE, HE OBSERVED THAT THE AFORESAID INCOME COULD NOT BE HELD AS AGR ICULTURAL EXEMPT FROM TAX AND ADDED THE SAME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME F ROM OTHER SOURCES. I.T.A.NO1297/12. :- 3 -: 6. THE CIT(A), IN LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, HAS DEL ETED THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AD NOT CALLED FOR ANY DETAILS REGARDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME OR LAND H OLDING PATTERN OF THE ASSESSEE. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER OBSERVED BY THE CIT (A) THAT IN PRECEDING AS WELL AS SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR, TH E ASSESSEES CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME STANDS ACCEPTED WITHOU T ANY QUERY. ACCORDINGLY, HE HAS DELETED THE ADDITION. THEREFORE, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES AND PERUSED THE CASE FIL E. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT NEITHER IT IS THE CASE OF THE RE VENUE THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED ANY ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN VIOLATION O F THE RELEVANT RULES NOR THAT HIS FINDINGS ARE CONTRARY TO THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS STATED HEREINABOVE, IT HAS COME ON RECORD IN LOWER APPELLA TE PROCEEDINGS THAT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST YEAR OF ASSESSEES AGRICULTU RAL OPERATIONS. IN THE COURSE OF ARGUMENTS, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE ASSESS EE IS HAVING 42 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. THAT BEING THE CASE, WE HARD LY SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) UNDER CHALL ENGE. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME STAND CONFIRMED. I.T.A.NO1297/12. :- 4 -: 8. THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON THURSDAY, THE 05 TH OF DECEMBER, 2013, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 05 TH DECEMBER, 2013 RD COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR