Ajit Kenjaru Hegde, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 5(4), Pune

ITA 2760/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5224 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-12-2018
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI , AM . / ITA NO. 2760 /P U N/201 7 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 3 - 1 4 SHRI AJIT KENJARU HEGDE FLAT NO.304, DESHPANDE DURG APARTMENT, BHOSALE NAGAR, PUNE 411047 . / APPELLANT PAN: A ARPH2594P VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WAD 5 ( 4 ), PUNE . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI ABHAY AVCHAT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH GAWALI / DATE OF HEARING : 18 . 12 .201 8 / DATE OF PRONOUNC EMENT: 06 . 0 2 .201 9 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ORDER OF CIT (A) - 13 , PUNE , DATED 2 0 . 09 .201 7 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 3 - 1 4 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE TAKEN WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER - ITA NO. 2760 /P U N/201 7 AJIT K HEGDE 2 ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, 1 . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), PUNE, HAS ERRED IN MAKI NG AGGREGATE ADDITIONS OF RS.11,80,000/ - AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 13, PUNE HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. 2 . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), PUNE, HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,20 ,000/ - UNDER THE PRETEXT OF INSU FFICIENT VEHICLE HIRE CHARGES CHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SYMPHONY HOTEL IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - 13, PUNE HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. 3 . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), PUNE, HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,60,000/ - TO THE INCOME, WHICH IS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - 13, PUNE HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. 3. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 RAIS ED BY ASSESSEE IS GENERAL IN NATURE. THE ISSUE RAISED VIDE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 IS AGAINST ADDITION OF 10,20,000/ - UNDER THE PRETEXT OF INSUFFICIENT VEHICLE HIRE CHARGES CHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SYMPHONY HOTEL, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTOR. TH E ISSUE IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.3 IS AGAINST ADDITION OF 1,60,000/ - MADE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BEING UNEXPLAINED INCOME, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT WAS AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN ITS HANDS. 4. THE ISSUE RAISED VIDE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 BEFOR E US IS MISPLACED AS THE PERUSAL OF ORDER OF CIT(A) AT PAGE 8 CLEARLY REFLECTS THAT THE ADDITION OF 10,20,000/ - HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A). HENCE, THE SAID GROUND OF APPEAL IS MISPLACED. 5. NOW, COMING TO THE LAST ISSUE WHETHER THE INCOME SHOWN IS AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS TO BE ACCEPTED OR NOT. BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAD NOT ACCEPTED THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE OF CARRYING OUT CULTIVATION OF HIS LAND. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT HE HAD GROWN COCONUT, MANGO, B ANANA, JACKFRUIT, CASHEW NUTS ON HIS AGRICUL TURAL LAND AND HAD EARNED INCOME OF 1,60,000/ - . THE SAID LAND WAS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AT TALUKA MANGALORE, SUB DIVISION SURATHKAL . ITA NO. 2760 /P U N/201 7 AJIT K HEGDE 3 ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS OWNING AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CIT(A) ALSO BUT THEY HAVE MADE THE AFORESAID ADDITION. AC CORDING TO THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ITS CASE OF EARNING AGRICULTURAL INCOME. WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE PLEA OF CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. HOWEVER, WE ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE TO THE EXTENT OF 1 LAKH, WHICH IS TO BE HELD TO BE AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE AND WE CONFIRM BALANCE ADDITION OF 60,000/ - IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.3 IS THUS, PARTLY ALLOWED. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE THUS, PARTLY ALLOWED. 6 . I N THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 6 TH DAY OF FEBR UARY , 201 9 . SD/ - SD/ - (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWL A ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 6 TH FEBR UARY , 201 9 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 13 , PUNE ; 4. THE PR. CIT - 3 , PUNE ; 5. 6. , , , - / DR SMC , ITAT, PUNE; / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE