ITO, CHENNAI V. Pattu Jeeva, CHENNAI

ITA 818/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 77324 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, C HENNAI . . . , !' , # $! % BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / I.T.A. NO.818/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD-XV(2), NO.121, ROOM NO.623, WANAPARTHY BLOCK, NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI-600 034 ( '& /APPELLANT) VS SHRI PATTU JEEVA, NO.91, VARADARAJAPURAM, MAIN ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI-18 [PAN: ADDPJ 6471 C] ( '('& /RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI GURU BHASHYAM, JCIT ASSESSEE BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 10-06-2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-06-2014 $) / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-VI, CHEN NAI, DATED 24-12-2013 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 200 9-10. THE REVENUE HAS ASSAILED THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(APPEAL S) IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADOPT ` 24,000/- PER ACRE AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS EARLIER ORDER RELATIN G TO THE AY.2007-08. I.T.A. NO. 818/MDS/2014 2 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS EMANATING FROM THE RECO RDS ARE, THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY.2009 -10 ON 30-09-2009 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 3,01,800/-. THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ` 35,98,852/- IN THE AY UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE TOTAL AREA OWNED BY THE ASSESSE E IS 88.61 ACRES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER RESTRICTED THE AGRICU LTURAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TO ` 2,10,000/- AND TREATED THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF ` 33,88,852/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT.07-12-20 11, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS ). THE CIT(APPEALS) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING HIS EARLIER ORDER FOR THE AY.2007-08 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. NOW, THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL ASSAILING THE FINDINGS O F THE CIT(APPEALS) ON THE ISSUE. 3. SHRI GURU BHASHYAM, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE D EPARTMENT VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND PRAYE D FOR SETTING ASIDE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD.DR AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE. THE I.T.A. NO. 818/MDS/2014 3 CIT(APPEALS) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OBSERVED THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS HAVING LEASE HOLD LAND TO THE EXTENT OF 88.61 ACRES . IN THE AY.2007-08, THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED AT ` 24,000/- PER ACRE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CHANGE IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CIT(APPEALS) FOLLOWED HIS EARLI ER ORDER. IN OUR VIEW, THE ISSUE RAISED IN APPEAL IS IDENTICA L TO THE ONE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN AY.2007-08. WE DO NOT FIND A NY ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IN FOLLOWING HIS EARLIER ORDER. THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON TUESDAY, THE 10 TH JUNE, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( !' ) (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VIKAS AWAS THY) / VICE PRESIDENT ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER '# /CHENNAI, $ /DATED: 10 TH JUNE,2014 TNMM #% & '( )#( /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. &,*+ /RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. (01 & 2 /DR 6. 13 4 /GF