, D/ SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D/SMC BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.641 /MDS./2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 ) MS.J.MUTHULAKSHMI, 35,VEGAVATHI STREET, RAJAJI NAGAR, VILLIVAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 049. VS. THE DCIT, COMPANY CIRCLE II(3), CHENNAI. PAN AGOPM 0835 D ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MS.S.SRINIRANJANI,ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT, D.R ! ' / DATE OF HEARING : 08.11.2017 #$%& ! ' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.11.2017 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-6, CHENNA I DATED 09.09.2017 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. ITA NO. 641/MDS/2017 2 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN HER APPEA L IS WITH REGARD TO TREATMENT OF 60% OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECL ARED BY THE ASSESSEE AS NON AGRICULTURAL INCOME I.E. INCOME FRO M OTHER SOURCES. 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DEC LARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT ` 44,54,870/-. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ONLY ` 17,82,000/- IS FROM THE AGRICULTURE AND THE BALANCE FROM 60% OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME I.E 26,72,8 70/- IS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES ON THE REASON THAT ON THE VERIFI CATION OF EXPENDITURE SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO MATCH OF LABOUR EXPENSES, FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDE EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF CROPS GROWN IN 28 ACRES. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE S AID QUERY AND NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE SUPPORTING VOUCHERS FOR EXPENSES EX CEPT FOR THE VALUE OF FEW THOUSAND RUPEES. ACCORDING TO LD. ASSE SSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SOME OTHER INCOME UNDER THE HEAD OF AGRICULTURE FOR WHICH SHE HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE SOU RCE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CA RRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) CO NFIRMED THE ORDER ITA NO. 641/MDS/2017 3 OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.C IT(A), NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD.A.R THAT THE ASSESS EE DECLARED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. IT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE AO AT 75% OF IT. ON THE SAME BASIS, 75% OF T HE PRESENT AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO BE CONSIDERED AS AGRICULTURA L INCOME AND BALANCE 25% TO BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES AS THERE SHOULD BE CONSISTENCY IN THE PROCEEDINGS. A.Y ADMITTED BY ASSESSEE (RS.) DISALLOWED BY AO (RS.) ACCEPTED BY AO (RS.) LAND HOLDING OF THE APPELLANT 2012-13 44,90,895 11,22,724 (25%) 33,68,171 (PAGE NO.10 OF PB) 28 ACRES, SITUATED AT KUNNAVALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT 2013-14 69,92,321 17,48,080 (25%) 52,44,241 (PAGE NO.16 OF PB) 2014-15 61,42,454 15,35,614 (25%) 46,06,840 (PAGE NO.24 OF PB) 4.1 CONSIDERING THE ACCEPTANCE OF AGRICULTURAL INC OME BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS AT 75% OF DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME, I AM INCLINED TO DIRE CT THE AO TO FOLLOW ITA NO. 641/MDS/2017 4 THE SAME PRINCIPLE FOR THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR ALSO AN D TO BE CONSIDERED ONLY 25% IN THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECL ARED BY THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. WITH THIS OB SERVATION, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 4.2 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PART LY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 08 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. SD/- ( ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 08 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 . K S SUNDARAM. ' ( )!*+ ,+%! / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ' ' -! () / CIT(A) 5. +0 1 )!)23 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ' ' -! / CIT 6. 1 45 6 / GF