Javaid Bhai.P.Ltd., Moradabad V. ITO, Ward-2(1), Moradabad

ITA 1608/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4337 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 154; 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1608/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Javaid Bhai P.Ltd., City Centre, Wajid Nagar, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. PAN-AAACJ0180B vs ITO, Ward-2(1), Moradabad. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 24.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 20.04.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2018- 19 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi dated 25.09.2021. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the learned Assessing Officer of the CPC was not correct on facts and ii the exempt Agricultural Income of Rs. 5,97,200/-. 2. The Assessing Officer of the CPC has not considered the reply of the notice under section 143(l)(a) for the purposes of adjustment and rectification application filed after the intimation issued by the CPC. 3. The addition made by the CPC is not correct and came under section 143(1 )(a). 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not going to the enclosure of balance sheet in which agricultural income was shown in the balance sheet under schedule -14. 5. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in observing in the appeal order. No additional evidence which neither ITA No.1608/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Page | 2 was before the Assessing Officer nor was with the CPC, while copy of balance sheet was filed showing agricultural income separately under schedule-14 to the balance sheet. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not giving the proper opportunity by asking the specific information and evidence of agricultural income which could not have been treated as additional evidence. It is, therefore, prayed to kindly allow due relief to the appellant.” 2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, there is a written submission filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. For the sake of clarity, the relevant contents of the written submissions are reproduced as under:- “As grounds of appeal are on the same points of agricultural income taxed as regular income without any observations, all the grounds No. 1 to 6 are taken together for adjudication. The agricultural income was of Rs. 597900/- having the bifurcation of the crops as under:- Wheat sale 245300/- Popular Trees sale 352600/- 597900/- The assessee is owning agricultural land measuring 4.8 hectare (11.86 acre). On such land the crop of agriculture as well as crop of popular trees was shown. This crop was sold for Rs. 597900/-. The agricultural income is exempt u/s 10(1). Therefore taxing it by the CPC without going to the return is arbitrary, unjustified and illegal also. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) again dismissed the appeal of the assessee that no retails of agricultural income is filed. Because the return was processed under section 143(1) by CPC and such type of addition is not permissible u/s 143(1) unless the case is examining by the Assessing Officer of jurisdiction. The Commissioner of Income-tax ITA No.1608/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Page | 3 (appeals) was fully empowered to ask details/ requirement to complete the assessment in the natural justice to the assessee. As assessee presently have no income and not in position to hire advocate for representation, the written arguments are sent to your good self for consideration on merits.” FACTS OF THE CASE 3. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring loss of Rs.5,38,720/- on 09.10.2018 and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Thereby, Central Processing Centre (“CPC”) treating the agricultural income of Rs.5,97,900/- as business income and after adjusting the same from the current year loss of Rs.5,38,720/- assessed the net income of Rs.59,180/-. Subsequently, the assessee filed rectification application u/s 154 of the Act on 10.07.2019. However, the application of the assessee was rejected and same income was assessed. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A) who after considering the submissions, sustained the finding of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. The assessee alongwith the submission has also filed certain evidences to prove the ownership of the land and sale of the agricultural produce. 7. Ld. Sr. DR opposed these submissions and submitted that these evidences were not filed before the authorities below. He contended that Ld. ITA No.1608/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Page | 4 CIT(A) in para 6.1 has categorically stated that the assessee failed to establish having earned agricultural income. 8. I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. I find that the assessee has filed certain evidences related to sale of agricultural produce and also the ownership of land. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts, I deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of AO for making denovo assessment after considering the evidences of the assessee as filed in support of this claim of earning agricultural income. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20 th April, 2022. Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER * Amit Kumar * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI