HIRJI NARAYAN PATEL, WHITEFIELD V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 613/BANG/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6641 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 17-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARITHIVEL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI KANERIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Earning of tax free income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 613/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : 2016 – 17 Shri Hirji Narayan Patel, #36, Dodda Katappa Road, Halasuru, Halasuru metro station, Bangalore North, Bangalore – 560 008. PAN: AAXPP6479R Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 4(2)(1), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ravi Kaneria, CA Revenue by : Shri Parithivel, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 11-10-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 11-10-2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 19.06.2023 passed by Ld.CIT(A) for A.Y. 2016-17 on following grounds of appeal: Page 2 of 4 ITA No. 613/Bang/2023 “Ground 1 - The learned CIT(A) erred in making addition of Rs.17,92,003/- as income from other sources rejecting the claim of the appellant as exempt income. Ground 2 - The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the claim of the appellant of agricultural income on the basis that no submissions/details were furnished by the appellant which is contrary to facts. Ground 3 - The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the claim of the appellant of agricultural income on the basis that non substantiated proof of Agricultural income and land ownership document. Ground 4 - The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the claim of the appellant of agricultural income on the basis that claim of sale of produce to local villagers is in Cash. Ground 5 - The learned CIT(A) erred in claiming agricultural income made by the appellant remains unexplained.” 2. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that the only issue alleged by the assessee before this Tribunal is in respect of the disallowance of agricultural income amounting to Rs.17,92,003/- claimed as exempt by the assessee. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee did not file the translated copy of the total land holding that are situated in the state of Gujarat and the details regarding the crops that was grown, which were in vernacular language. 2.1 It was further submitted that at the time when the assessment was pending before the Ld.AO, the notice was issued by the Ld.AO for physical hearing. Subsequently the case was transferred to the faceless assessment. The assessee could not file any submissions through email for the faceless assessment. 2.2 The assessment order was thus passed on 11.12.2018 is without considering the documents that was initially filed by the assessee physically before the Ld.AO. Page 3 of 4 ITA No. 613/Bang/2023 Against the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 2.3 Since the assessee could not file the relevant document in support to show that the agricultural income earned by assessee is exempt, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order passed. Against the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A), assessee preferred appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 3.1 In our opinion, it appropriate to remit the issue back to the file of the Ld.AO with a direction to the assessee to produce necessary evidence in respect of the agricultural income alleged to be exempt by the assessee. The Ld.AO shall consider the issue based on the evidences filed by the assessee afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. 4. We note that the notice issued by this Tribunal was returned back with some comment by the postal department. However, the Ld.AR has submitted that the Ld.AO may be directed to issue notices to the following address and the email ID as recorded hereinbelow. Assessee Details Name: HIRJI NARAYAN PATEL Address: #36, Dodda Katappa Road, Halasuru, Halasuru metro station, Bangalore North, Bangalore, Karnataka - 560008 Mail ID: [e-mail] Page 4 of 4 ITA No. 613/Bang/2023 Chartered Accountant Details Name: CA RAVI KANERIA Address: #325/E, 1 st Floor, CVS Plaza, Nayandahalli Bus Stop, Mysore Road, Pantharapalya, Bengaluru, Karnataka - 560039 Mail ID: [e-mail] 5. The Ld.AO is thus directed to issue notices to the assessee to the address mentioned hereinabove. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11 th October, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 11 th October, 2023. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore