Shailendra Namadev Rasal, Sangli V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Sangli

ITA 1712/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7570 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2019
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJEEV GHEI
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . / ITA NO.1712/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 SHAILENDRA NAMADEV RASAL, SALSHINGE ROAD, A.P. GARDI 415311 TAL KHANPUR DIST., SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA. PAN : BEWPR3488E. . / APPELLANT V/S THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, SANGLI. . / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI KISHOR PHADKE. REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJEEV GHEI. / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 1, KOLHAPUR DATED 21 .08.2018 FOR A.Y. 2015-16. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RE CORD ARE AS UNDER :- ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL HAVING INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE AND OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE ELECTRONICALLY FILED HIS RETURN O F INCOME FOR A.Y. 2015-16 ON 14.07.2016 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.5,440/- . THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S / DATE OF HEARING : 18.09.2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24.10.2019 2 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 20.12.2017 AND THE TOT AL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.36,22,140/- AND INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE WA S RESTRICTED TO RS.20,24,880/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A O, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 21.08.2018 (IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A)-1/10196/2017-18) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN FACT & IN LAW IN C ONFIRMING ADDITIONS MADE BY AO, OF RS.3616700/- WITHOUT APPRECIATING TH E FACT THAT THE AREA CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER CULTIVATION IS ENTIRELY MATCHES & TALLY WITH THE REGISTER MAINTAINED IN TAL ATHI OFFICE, I.E RETURN OF EDUCATION TAX ASSESSMENT OF GOVT OF MAHAR ASHTRA, & HENCE THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN YIELD OF CROP & ARE A OF CROP AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. LEARNED CIT (A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. OF RS.3616700/- WITHOUT CONSIDERING PRO PERLY THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF EDUCATION TAX AS SESSMENT RETURN OF GOVT OF MAHARASHTRA. THE ORDER PASSED BY CI'T (A) BEING PATENTLY ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, PERVERSE AND DEV OID OF MERITS, THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE VACATED. 3. LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED & FAILED TO APPRECIAT E THAT, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BEFORE HIM I.E. EDUCATION TAX ASSESSMENT RETURN OF GOVT OF MAHARASHTRA WOULD MAKE TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN THE FINDINGS OF A.O. ABOUT AREA UNDER POMEGRANATE CULTIVATION. 3. ALL THE GROUNDS BEING INTER-CONNECTED ARE CONSIDERED TOGETHE R. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AO NOTIC ED THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION OF POME GRANATES, GRAPES AND OTHER PRODUCE LIKE SOYABEAN, PAPAYA ETC., ON THE AGRICULTURAL LAND OWNED BY HIMSELF AND OTHER MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY. DU RING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTE D 7/12 EXTRACT IN SUPPORT OF CULTIVATION OF POMEGRANATES ON 15 ACRES AND GRAPES ON 6 ACRES. AO NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY IN 7/1 2 EXTRACT AND THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY TALATHI ON 09.08.2017. AO THEREFORE HELD 7/12 3 EXTRACT TO BE MORE AUTHENTIC DOCUMENT TO KNOW THE A GRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE W AS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE PRODUCE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SUBMISS IONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE AO. AO CONCLUDED THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING HIG H YIELD FROM THE LAND AS CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE. HE THEREFORE RESTRICTED THE YIELD OF POMEGRANATES TO 10 TONNES PER ACRE TOTALLING TO 60 TO NNES OF TOTAL PRODUCTION OF POMEGRANATES IN THE 6 ACRES OF LAND UNDER CULTIVATION AND THEREAFTER ON THE BASIS OF WHOLESALE MARKET RATES, W ORKED OUT THE PRODUCTION AND ACCORDINGLY RESTRICTED THE SALE OF POMEGR ANATE TO RS.28,24,800/- AS AGAINST THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF PRODUCT ION OF POMEGRANATES AT RS.75,41,520/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO UPHELD T HE ORDER OF AO. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL. 5. BEFORE ME, LD.A.R. REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE AO AND LD.CIT(A) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS CERT AIN ERROR IN THE CERTIFICATE GIVEN BY TALATHI AND 7/12 EXTRACT. HE PLACED O N RECORD THE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATED COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY TALATHI ON 09.08.2017 AND POINTED TO THE AREA OF CULTIVATION OF POM EGRANATES AS GIVEN IN THE CERTIFICATE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN SUBS EQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E., A.Y. 2016-17 THE RATES FROM POMEGRAN ATES AND GRAPES WAS ACCEPTED BY THE AO IN TOTALITY AND NO ADDITIO N HAS BEEN MADE DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE AREA OF THE CULTIVATION RE MAINED THE SAME IN A.Y. 2015-16 AND A.Y. 2016-17 AND THERE WAS NO FURTHER AREA OF LAND THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO CULTIVATION OR IT WAS NOT A CASE W HETHER THE 4 ASSESSEE HAD SOLD LAND IN A.Y. 2015-16. HE THEREFORE FAIRL Y SUBMITTED THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO TH E HOLDING OF THE LAND AS GIVEN BY TALATHI VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 09.08.2017 VIS--VIS 7/12 EXTRACT MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR NECESS ARY VERIFICATION. LD.A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IF THE MATTER IS REMITTED BA CK TO THE FILE OF AO, ASSESSEE WILL CO-OPERATE AND FURNISH NECESSARY EV IDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AO AND LD.CIT(A) AND OBJECTED TO THE PRAYER OF 2 ND INNINGS SOUGHT BY LD.A.R. 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT GROUND MAINLY IS WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCE OF POMEGRANATE AS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN GROWN B Y THE ASSESSEE AND THE ESTIMATE MADE BY THE AO. IT IS THE CLAIM OF REVE NUE THAT WHEN THERE IS DISCREPANCY IN THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY TALATHI A ND 7/12 EXTRACT, THEN 7/12 EXTRA BEING MORE AUTHENTIC DOCUMENT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT TALATHI WHO IS ALSO AN OFFICIAL OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT, HAS CERTIFIED AREA OF CULTIVATION WH ICH IS TO BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT APPEARING IN 7/12 EXTRACT. IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT IN A.Y. 2016-17, THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO THE R ECEIPTS FROM POMEGRANATE AND GRAPES WAS ACCEPTED IN TOTALITY BUT HO WEVER FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS AGAINST THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE OF HAVING GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.75,41,000/-, AO CONSIDERED THE GROSS RECEIPTS AT RS.33.74 LAKHS WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY CHANGE IN LAND HOLD ING OR ANY OTHER FACTOR WHICH HAS BROUGHT ON RECORD. CONSIDERING T HE TOTALITY OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE NEEDS RE-EXAMINATION AT THE END OF AO. I THEREFORE RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK T O THE FILE OF AO AND DIRECT HIM TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH T HE LAW AFTER 5 CONSIDERING THE CERTIFICATE OF TALATI, 7/12 EXTRACT AND AN Y OTHER EVIDENCE AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY HIM. NEEDLESS TO STATE THAT AO SHALL GRANT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PROMPTLY FURNISH ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY TH E AUTHORITIES. THE AO SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON THE B ASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD, IF THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE REQUIRED DOC UMENTS. IN VIEW OF MY DECISION TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO, I A M NOT ADJUDICATING ON MERITS THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL RAISED B Y THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 24 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019. SD /- ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 24 TH OCTOBER, 2019. YAMINI #$%&'(' % / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. 4. 5 6. CIT(A)-1, KOLHAPUR. PR. CIT-1, KOLHAPUR. '#$ %%&',) &', *+ / DR, ITAT, SMC PUNE; $-.// GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // 012%3&4 / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) &', / ITAT, PUNE.