P. BALAKRISHNAN(HUF), TRICHY V. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

ITA 550/CHNY/2023

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by P. Balakrishnan (HUF) against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 143(3) and 254 of the Income Tax Act. The primary issues in the appeals were the confirmation of protective additions regarding undisclosed investments in land and the treatment of agricultural income as income from other sources. These issues were interconnected with a lead case involving Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan, where similar substantive additions were made but were later deleted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficient cultivable land and the income from this land was used for the investments in question, thus supporting the deletion of the additions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134187 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan in ITA No. 02/Chny/2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 260A; 158BC

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय ी मनोज कुमार अ&वाल ,लेखा सद) के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.550/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / As sessment Year: 1996-97) & आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.551/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / As sessment Year: 1997-98) P. Balakrishnan (HUF) Tamil Pannai House Main Road, Kuzhumani, Trichy-639 103. बनाम/ V s . ACIT Central Circle-II(3), Chennai. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. A C AP B- 8951 -D (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri M.Karunakaran (Advocate)- Ld. AR थ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D.Hema Bhupal, (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Dat e of He a rin g : 24-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27-09-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for captioned assessment years have identical issues and the same arises out of common order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [CIT(A)] on 17-02-2023 in the matter of separate assessments framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act on 24-02-2014. These appeals were heard along with lead case of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan 2 in ITA No. 02/Chny/2016 which has separately been disposed-off by us partly allowing the appeal of the assessee. 2. In the present appeals, the grievance of the assessee is confirmation of certain protective addition of undisclosed investment in purchase of land. Further, the agricultural income has been treated as income from other sources. The substantive addition was made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan which has been deleted by us in that appeal. Accordingly, the issue of impugned addition in the hands of the assessee, on merits, is disposed-off by us as under. 3. From the fact, it emerges that the assessee is connected to Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan, Ex-Minister, Government of Tamil Nadu in whose case a search was conducted and an order was passed in his case u/s 158BC r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 254 r.w.s. 260A of the Act on 28.03.2013. In the case of present assessee, an assessment was framed on 31.03.1999 determining income of Rs.4.37 Lacs. However, the same was set aside by Tribunal to the file of Ld. AO for fresh disposal considering the fact that substantiative assessment made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan was also remanded back to the file of Ld. AO. Pursuant to these, directions, impugned assessment has been framed on 24.02.2014 which has been confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the same is in further challenge before us. 4. In the assessment order for AY 1996-97, Ld. AO has made addition of undisclosed investment in land for Rs.1.98 Lacs. Further, the agricultural income of Rs.2.26 Lacs has been treated as income from other sources. In AY 1997-98, agricultural income of Rs.2.26 Lacs has been treated as income from other sources. The assessee relied on evidences / documents furnished during original assessment 3 proceedings which were rejected by Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the assessment for want of any response from the assessee. Aggrieved as aforesaid, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 5. As stated earlier, the lead order has been passed by us in the case of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan in ITA No. 02/Chny/2016 wherein substantiative addition relating to present assessee has been deleted by us. So far as the present assessee is concerned, we find that Ld. AO has made impugned addition by rejecting the claim of agricultural income. However, upon perusal of certificate of Village Administrative Officer as placed on record, it could be seen that the assessee is having sufficient cultivable land. The income has been used to make the impugned investments. This being so, the impugned additions, in both the years, has no legs to stand. By deleting the same, we allow both the appeals of the assessee. 6. Both the appeals stand allowed. Order pronounced on 27 th September,2023 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद7 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे9ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :27-09-2023 DS आदेशकीBितिलिपअ&ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथ /Appellant2. यथ /Respondent 3.आयकरआय ु त/CIT 4. वभागीय त न ध/DR 5.गाड फाईल/GF