ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Rajdhani Nursuries Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5477/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0178 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH MEENA
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.5477/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI. VS. RAJDHANI NURSERIES LTD., B-30, LAWRENCE ROAD, INDUSTRIAL AREA, NEW DELHI. PAN: AABCS1484Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI OM PRAKASH MEENA, SR.DR ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 14.7.2014 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPE AL READS AS UNDER:- THE CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN TREATING THE BUSINESS LOSS ASSESSED BY THE AO AS AGRICULTURAL LOSS. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN SALE OF PLANTATION. IT FILED RETURN DEC LARING INCOME OF RS.9 LAC. ITA NO.5477/DEL/2014 2 DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE AO THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2009-10, AGRICU LTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPR EME COURT AGAINST THE ORDER OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF THE AS SESSEE ITSELF AND THAT DECISION IS STILL AWAITED. HE FOLLOWED THE VIEW TA KEN IN EARLIER YEAR. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS RAISED I N APPEALS FOR 2005-06 TO 2009-10 AND THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE T RIBUNAL HAVE DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN THE ASSESSEES FAVOUR. FOLLOWING THE SAME, HE ALSO CONSIDERED THE INCOME DECLARED AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME INSTEAD OF `BUSINESS INCOME ASSESSED BY THE AO. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AGAIN ST THIS TREATMENT. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSE E DESPITE NOTICE. AS SUCH, I AM PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF THE AO TH AT HE FOLLOWED THE OPINION TAKEN BY HIM IN EARLIER YEARS FOR HOLDING T HE INCOME CLAIMED AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS BUSINESS INCOME. IT IS BORN E OUT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS APPROVED THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.5477/DEL/2014 3 ON THIS ISSUE IN EARLIER YEARS. IT CAN ALSO BE OBS ERVED FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE LD. AO HAS MENTIONED THAT THE DEPART MENT IS STILL ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS JUDGMENT BE FORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD T O INDICATE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN EARLIER YEARS HAS BEEN REVERSED OR MODIFIED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT, I UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REV ENUE IS DISMISSED. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JULY, 2015. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED: 29 TH JULY, 2015. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI