Shri Nazeer Ahmed, Kolar V. ITO, Kolar

ITA 498/BANG/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9538 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JACINTA ZIMIK VASHAI
• Keywords: Agreed addition
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE SHRI N.L.KALRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE, K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.498(BANG)/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) SHRI NAZEER AHMED, BEECHAGANAHALLI, GUDIBANDA TQ. .... APPELLANT VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KOLAR. .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI KASHINATH KALMATH. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JACINTA ZIMIK VASHAI O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-V, BANGALORE, DATED 18-3-2009. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR CONCERNED IS 2005-06. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ADDITION OF RS.1,10,000/- TO THE RETURNED INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 3. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL. SINCE NO RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE, NOTICE U/S 142(1) WAS ISSUED AND IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, RETU RN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON10-12-2007 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD ADM ITTED INCOME AT RS.16,230/- AND THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME A T RS.1 LAKH. ITA 498/B/2009 PAGE 2 OF 4 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, ASSESS EE ALONG WITH HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED A ND OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME AT RS.1,10,000/- APART FROM INCOM E RETURNED ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSMENT WAS CONCLUDED FIXING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,14,238/- AND RS.1 LAKH AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME TOTALING RS.2,14,238/-. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ADDITION OF RS.1,10,000/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND CONTENDED THAT HIS ONLY SOURCE O F INCOME IS INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE AND INTEREST EARNED ON DEPO SITS MADE IN BANK. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT WERE MADE OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME A ND HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME WHICH IS LIABLE TO TAX. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THE OFFER OF ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.1,10,000/- BEFORE AO IS NOT CORRECT AND HE HAD AGREED FOR ONLY ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT AND ON RECEIPT OF THE SAME DISMISSED THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THUS: 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS A FACT THAT ADDITIONAL INCOME WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION BEF ORE THE AO BY THE AR OF THE APPELLANT AS IS EVIDENCED F ROM THE REMAND REPORT. THE PLEA OF THE APPELLANT THAT T HE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN AT RS.100,000/-HAS BEEN MISTAKEN AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IS NOT CORREC T AND TENABLE BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF RS.110,000/- IS DIFFERENT FROM THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.100,00 0/-. ITA 498/B/2009 PAGE 3 OF 4 THIS ADDITION IS MADE ON AGREED BASIS AND THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR APPEAL FOR AGREED ADDITION. APPEAL DOES N OT LIE AGAINST AGREED ADDITIONS 78 ITD 176 (RAJ). IN V IEW OF THIS, THE GROUND OF APPEAL FAILS AND THE ISSUE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE DEPARTMENT. 6. THE ASSESSEE, BEING AGGRIEVED, IS IN APPEAL BEFO RE US. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUB MISSIONS HE MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED ANY AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RETRACTING THE OFFER HE HAD MADE BEFORE THE AO NOR HE HAS FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS THE BASIS FOR ADDITION HAD COME OUT OF AG RICULTURAL INCOME. 7. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATE RIAL ON RECORD. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ADDITIO N OF RS.1,10,000/- IS MADE BY THE AO BASED ON THE OFFER MADE BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IN THE PRESENCE OF THE AS SESSEE. THIS ADDITION WAS OFFERED ON ACCOUNT OF CREDITS IN BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. AS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED D R, ASSESSEE HAD NOT RETRACTED FROM THE OFFER MADE BEFORE THE AO BY FILING AFFIDAVIT, NOR HAS HE PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ARE OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW AND NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. ITA 498/B/2009 PAGE 4 OF 4 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21ST AUGUST, 2009. SD/- SD/- (N.L.KALRA) (GEORGE GEORGE K) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 21 ST AUGUST,2009. EKS* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A)-V, BANGALORE. 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE (1+1) BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRA R, ITAT, BANGALORE.