Sri.Jose Joseph, Cochin V. The ITO, Kottayam

ITA 255/COCH/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8500 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A DHANARAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: NONEADJT PETITION REJECTED

Judgement Text

ITA NO.255/COCH/2016 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI B P JAIN, AM ITA NO.255/COCH/2016 (ASST YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI JOSE JOSEPH, KINATTUKARA HOUSE, KALAKETTY P.O., PINNAKKANADU, KOTTAYAM-686 508 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2, KOTTAYAM. ( ASSESSEE APPELLANT) VS (REVENUE -RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AEGPJ 5758J ASSESSEE BY NONE-ADJT. PETITION REJECTED REVENUE BY SHRI A. DHANARAJ, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 24/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24/06/2016 ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, AM: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), KOTTAYAM DATED 28-03-2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICAT ION FOR WHICH NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AND THEREFORE , THE SAME IS REJECTED. ACCORDINGLY, I PROCEED TO DECIDE THIS CASE EX PARTE AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ITA NO.255/COCH/2016 2 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 14 GROUND S OF APPEAL BUT ONLY FOR ONE ISSUE WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED T HE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.6,76,957/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2008-09 DECLARING A NET INCOME OF RS.1,19,166/- AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.10,00,000/-. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6, 76,957/- AND ADDED THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER. 6. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED RS.4,50,000/- AS AGR ICULTURAL INCOME IN THE HANDS OF HIS WIFE WHO IS A SEPARATE ASSESSEE BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO INCLUDED RS.4,50,000/- AS AGRICUL TURAL INCOME INTO THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.10 LAKHS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS DOUBLE INCLUSION OR DOUBLE TAXATION OF THE INCOME W HICH IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE EYES OF LAW. THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD THA T THE ASSESSEES WIFE IS NOT HAVING AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND THEREFORE, THE S AID RS.4,50,000/- CANNOT BE INCLUDED INTO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ITA NO.255/COCH/2016 3 SAME CANNOT BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . THEREFORE, THE SAID RS.4,50,000/- IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED FROM T HE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7 AS REGARDS OTHER ADDITIONS, I CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS A REASONED ORDER AND I FIND NO INFIRMITY IN HIS ORD ER. THUS THE ASSESSEE GETS PART RELIEF AND ACCORDINGLY, ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I. T.A. NO.255/COCH/2016 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 - 06-2016 SD/- (B.P. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : COCHIN DATED: 24TH JUNE , 2016 GJ COPY TO: 1. SHRI JOSE JOSEPH, KINATTUKARA HOUSE, KALAKETTY P.O., PINNAKKANADU, KOTTAYAM-686 508 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), KOTTAYA M. ITA NO.255/COCH/2016 4 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTAYAM. 5. THE DR/ITAT, COCHIN BENCH. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, COCHIN