Late M.P Padmanabhan Through L/H Smt. Smita Vinod &Smt. Simi Vishnu, Bhopal V. The I.T.O., Bhopal

ITA 88/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9502 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: M K SHARMA; KISHORE CHAWLA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 88/IND/2010 A.Y. 2001-02 SMT. SMITA BINOD & SMT. SIMI VISHNU L/H OF LATE M.P. PADMANABHAN BHOPAL PAN AFWPP-2581A APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), INDORE RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : S/ SHRI M.K. SHARMA AND KISHORE CHAWLA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K. MITRA O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) DATED 1 3 TH NOVEMBER, 2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 148/143(3) OF THE ACT. 2 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO TH E ADDITION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.3,38,370/- OUT OF THE ADD ITION OF RS.3,67,400/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE LATE SHRI M .P. PADANABHAN HAD SHOWN TAXABLE INCOME FROM PENSION OF RS. 38,400 /- AND CLAIMED EXEMPTED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 8,81,300/-. THE ASSESSEE OWNED AGRICULTURAL LAND IN KERALA AS WELL AS AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 18.86 ACRES IN RATANPUR AREA, BHOPAL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.8,81,300/- AS UNDER AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM KERALA RS.3,23,900/- AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND IN BHOPAL RS.5,57,400/- RS.8,81,300/- THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE OWNED AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 18.86 ACRES IN RATANPUR AND NARENA H ANUMANTSINGH BHOPAL. THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 26.12.2008 FU RNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE REGARDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS NOT FOUN D SATISFACTORY BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBS ERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN HIGHER THAN THE ACTUAL AGRICULTU RAL INCOME. THE 3 ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME @ RS. 10,000/- PER ACRE IN RESPECT OF LAND SITUATED AT BHOPAL AND, ACCORDINGLY, TREATED RS. 1,99,000/- AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND M ADE ADDITION OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,67,400/- (RS. 557400 RS. 190000) AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES U/S 68 OF THE IT AC T. 4. BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (AP PEALS) THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS OF T HE CASE. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM THE LAND SITUATED IN MADHYA PRADESH AT RS. 6,21,270/-. THE GROSS SALE P ROCEEDS OF THE CROP WAS RS. 8,20,770/- AND THE EXPENDITURE INCURRE D ON FERTILIZER, PESTICIDES, SEEDS, LABOUR CHARGES, ETC. WAS OF RS. 1,99,500/- RESULTING INTO NET INCOME OFRS. 6,21,270/-. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE HOLDING OF LAND MEASURING 18.86 ACRES WAS ADMITTED AND THERE W AS NO DOUBT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD UNDERTAKEN AGRICULTURAL ACTIV ITIES ON THE SAID LAND. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED PROOF TOWARDS AGR ICULTURAL PROCEEDS AND EXPENSES INCURRED AND THE ASSESSING OF FICER HAS NOT RAISED ANY SPECIFIC OBJECTION AGAINST THIS. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE TOTAL AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE CON SISTED OF THREE CROPS I.E. ONE CROP OF THE EARLIER YEAR AND TWO CRO P OF THE YEAR UNDER 4 CONSIDERATION. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSING OF FICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADHOC ADDITION WITHOUT ANY VALI D REASON. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO FURNISHED DETAILS OF SALE PROCEED S AND EXPENDITURE INCURRED WHICH WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THUS, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.6,21,270/- (RS.8,20,770 RS. 1,99,500) FROM THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AT RATANPUR, BHOPAL AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADHOC ADDITION OF RS.3,67,400/-. IT WAS PRAYED BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM ETAX (APPEALS) THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,67,400/- MAY BE DELETED. 5. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) COMPUTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOM E AT RS. 15,000/- PER ACRE. ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS.3,6 7,770/- WAS RETAINED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX ( APPEALS) AT RS. 3,38,370/- AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) HAS ONL Y CONSIDERED CROP OF WHEAT AND CHANA AND ACCORDINGLY ESTIMATED Y IELD PER ACRE AT RS. 15,000/- WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO HAVING C ROP OF SOYA WHICH HAS BEEN TOTALITY IGNORED BY HIM. OUR ATTENT ION WAS DRAWN TO 5 THE DETAILED CHART OF PRODUCTION AND SALE IN RESPEC T OF VARIOUS CROPS FURNISHED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WHEREIN WE F IND THAT THERE WAS PRODUCTION OF 72 BAGS OF SOYA WHICH WAS ALLOWED TO BE SOLD @ RS. 980/- PER BAG YIELDING RS. 70,560/- ON 18.11.2000. FURTHER, THERE WAS SALE OF 185 BAGS OF SOYA RS. 980/- YIELDING RS . 1,81,300/- ON 11.1.2000. AS PER THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, THE PRODUCTION AND SALE OF SOYA HAS BEEN COMPLETELY IGN ORED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) WHILE E STIMATING THE PRODUCTION OF 15,000 PER ACRE. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED SR. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, CAREFU LLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE DETAILED CHART OF PRODUCTION AND SALE OF VARIOUS PRODUCE LIKE WHEAT, CHANA, SOYA, PLACED ON RECORD DULY INDICATING THE MONTH OF PRODU CTION AND ALSO DATE OF SALE, RATE AT WHICH THE PRODUCE WAS SOLD. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO GIVEN DETAILED BREAK UP OF THE VARIOUS EXPENDI TURE INCURRED FOR PRODUCING THESE CROPS WHICH IN TOTAL AMOUNTED TO RS . 1,99,500/-. THUS, THE TOTAL NET INCOME OF RS.6,21,270/- WAS SHO WN IN RESPECT OF LAND OF 18.86 ACRES IN RATANPUR AREA, BHOPAL, YIELD ING AVERAGE RATE OF 6 RS. 33,000/- PER ACRE. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) ESTIMATED RS. 15,000/- PER ACRE. KEEPING IN VIEW THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AS NARRATED BY TH E LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) IN HIS ORDER WH ICH HAS NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED, IT WOULD BE MOST REASONABLE TO E STIMATE THE INCOME AT RS. 22,000/- PER ACRE OF LAND FOR COMPUTI NG THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO VARIOU S CROPS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO RECOMPUTED THE AGR ICULTURAL INCOME BY TAKING THE INCOME OF RS.22,000/- PER ACRE OF LAN D. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED IN PART IN TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF L EARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES ON 28 MARCH, 20 11. (JOGINDER SINGH) ( R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 28 TH MARCH, 2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE DN/-