SHRIMATI HARPREET KAUR SAINI , HOSHIARPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, HOSHIARPUR

ITA 9/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6240 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SURENDRA MAHAJAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 9-10/ASR/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Smt. Harpreet Kaur Saini, Afgan Road, Hoshiarpur [PAN: DLCPS0848L] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hoshiarpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sh. Surendra Mahajan, CA Respondent by: Sh. S.M. Surendranath (DR) Date of Hearing: 02.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 23.03.2022 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The captioned appeals by the assessee are directed against the order even dated 03.10.2017 of the Commissioner of income tax, appeals-1, Jalandhar in respect of assessment year 2013-14 and 2014- 15. 2. Facts in brief, as per record are that the appellant assessee cases were selected for scrutiny under CASS, as the assessee has claimed large amount of agriculture income in both the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 to the tune of Rs. 38 and 45 lakhs respectively. The AO 2 ITA. No. 9-10/ASR/2018 Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 stated that assessee has claimed to have grown various types of trees like popular and eucalyptus trees and agricultural crops and income mainly from the sale of plants in addition to normal crops of Rabi and kharif. In support the assessee has enclosed certificate of the forest range officer. The AO has directed inspector of this office to conduct field enquire to ascertain the facts regarding the nature of cultivation of the crops by the assessee wherein the inspector reports that from the neighbouring cultivators it was revealed that she had 3 to 4 acres Land under tree cultivation, another 3 to 4 acres of land under fresh sown wheat besides 5 to 6 acres of land where the trees have been cut more than two years back and the offshoots were grown. The AO being not satisfied with the reply of the assessee, in the absence of books of accounts and required documentary evidence in particular held that the assessee has claimed agriculture income at higher side and accordingly, restricted agriculture income 33 lakhs and 39 lakhs in respect of assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 and thus, he has made an addition of rupees 5 lakhs and 6 lakhs respectively. 3. Being aggrieved, assessee went before the learned CIT appeal who has confirmed the addition by observing that the agriculture income shown by the appellant assessee pertaining to be derived from the part of the land belonging to her husband, brother-in-law, and father-in-law is not 3 ITA. No. 9-10/ASR/2018 Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 supported by any documentary evidence. He also observed that the assessee has not produced any evidence to establish performance of agricultural operations, sale of agricultural produce or trees and agricultural expenses being incurred by her and further she has not filed form J or any proof of sale of trees or crops etc. 4. The assessee being aggrieved from the order of the CIT appeal is in appeal before us. The learned AR for the assessee has reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below. The learned AR contended that the only case of the AO while making the additions has been based on doubts to the extent of a tree income in the absence of maintenance of books of accounts. He contended that there is no legal bar to declare income of agricultural land held by the husband of the assessee and same is being cultivated by her and husband of the assessee has not declared any such income in tax return. The Ld. AR has argued that estimation of income at Rs. 33 and 39 lakhs and income from other sources at Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 6 lakhs in respect of assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 without any material whatsoever and is based on assumption and presumption by the AO and the learned CIT appeal is not permitted. In support, he placed reliance on citations as per brief note filed. 4 ITA. No. 9-10/ASR/2018 Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and the citations filed with the written submissions before us. It is admitted fact on record that the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts and she has also not produced any documentary evidences regarding performance of agricultural operations, sale of agricultural produce or trees and agricultural expenses being incurred by her and further she has not filed form J or any proof of sale of trees, like bills and books of accounts. 6. We understand that the agriculture is such a profession where the expenses are required to incurred for the agricultural activities to be carried out either for the cultivation of agricultural crops or even for plantation of trees. In general, it is seen that lady members of the family are not assigned with the job of agriculture profession on the agriculture land belonged to other family members, particularly where the husband owned the major part of the land. Exceptionally, in the present case, the land of the husband, brother-in-law and father-in-law is being claimed to be cultivated by her without any cogent documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the agricultural activities and agriculture produce thereof. The citations relied upon by the ld. AR are distinguished on the peculiar facts of the present case. In our view, the assessing officer has been too generous in considering such higher magnitude of 5 ITA. No. 9-10/ASR/2018 Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 agricultural income to the tune of Rs. 33 lakhs and 39 lakhs in respect of assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively in the absence of cogent documentary evidences. We, therefore, find no merit and substance in the submissions of the ld AR and accordingly the addition of Rs. 5 lakhs and 6 lakhs made as income from other sources in respect of assessment of 2013-14 and 2014-15 is hereby sustained. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23.03.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (AnikeshBanerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member Doc* Date: 23.03.2022 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order