Shri Pradhyumansinghji J. Padhiyar (HUF), Anand V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(2), Petlad

ITA 79/AHD/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Pradhyumansinghji J. Padhiyar (HUF), the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs.27,97,730 as income from other sources, treating it as non-agricultural income. The original assessment was reopened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following scrutiny of agricultural income claims in A.Y. 2013-14, which were found to be inconsistent. The Tribunal noted that a similar issue had been previously set aside for proper verification in A.Y. 2012-13 and decided to remand the matter for further investigation and proper adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129468 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2022
• Other Referred Cases: ITA no.1374/Ahd/2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay
• Section: 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA No.79/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.79/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Pradhyumansinghji J. vs. Income Tax Officer, Padhiyar (HUF), Ward – 1(3)(2), Petlad. Darbar Gadh, At Post, Umeta, Tal: Anklav Umeta, Gujarat – 388 510 [PAN – AAKHP 2872 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, AR Revenue by : Ms. Chitra Soneji, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 18.04.2023 Date of pronouncement : 19.04.2023 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 25.12.2021 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of IT Act by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the first appellate authority u/s.250 is bad in law and deserved to be uncalled for. 2. The Assessing Officer as well as first appellate authority has erred in law and on facts in making and confirming respectively the addition of Rs.27,97,730/- by treating agricultural receipts as income from other source. The same deserves to be deleted.” 3. The assessee filed his original e-return on 21.03.2017 determining total income at Rs.97,350/- and claimed exemption of income under the head of agricultural income to the tune of Rs.27,97,730/-. The case was reopened and selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 10.04.2015 which was duly served upon the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that in A.Y. 2013-14 detailed enquiries were carried out and after the cross investigation the claim of the assessee for income from agriculture to the tune of ITA No.79/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Page 2 of 3 Rs.57,50,739/- was rejected. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.27,97,730/- as income from other sources. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that there was a delay of 30 days for filing the present appeal for which the assessee has explained the delay by filing condonation of delay application. 6. The Ld. DR objected to the delay condonation application. 7. Since the assessee has explained the delay on the part of the Tax Practitioner who has not filed the appeal within the time, the delay appears to be genuine and hence the same is condoned. 8. The Ld. AR submitted that in A.Y. 2012-13 on the very same agricultural income the assessee’s case was set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication and verification of the land and its use and the facts in the present A.Y. i.e. 2011-12 is related to the said land and the agricultural income thereto. 9. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 10. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In the identical situation for A.Y. 2012-13 the agricultural land in question was the same agricultural land in the present A.Y. i.e. 2011-12 and in respect of the portion of the land which is cultivable land the Talati statement was cross-examined in this year as well. Therefore, on similar line as to that of A.Y. 2012-13 (i.e. ITA no.1374/Ahd/2017, order dated 15.06.2022), it will be appropriate to remand back this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication and verification of the land and its use with respect of the assessment for A.Y. 2011-12. Needles to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. ITA No.79/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Page 3 of 3 11. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 19 th day of April, 2023. Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 19 th day of April, 2023 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad