AIIMS Promoters Private Limited, New Delhi V. ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi

ITA 9588/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves AIMS Promoters Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the orders of the CIT(A)-37, New Delhi, for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12. The primary issue was the addition of Rs. 6,17,600 as undisclosed agricultural income, which the Assessing Officer (AO) had estimated ad hoc. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, leading to the appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT examined the evidence presented by the assessee, including land revenue records and receipts of agricultural products, and found them sufficient to substantiate the agricultural income claimed. The ITAT's decision was based on the inability of the revenue to effectively challenge the veracity of the documents provided by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 131049 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Shri Malook Nagar
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144; 72

Judgement Text

Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9587/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No. 9588/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No. 9589/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 AIMS Promoters Pvt. Ltd., D-3/10, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Vs ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAFCA8806Q Assessee by : Sh. Rajat Jain, CA & Sh. Akashat Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 19.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 28.12.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: These appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A)-37, New Delhi dated 10.10.2019 for Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2011-12. 2. Since, the issues involved in all these appeals are identical, they were heard together and being adjudicated by a common order. 3. In ITA No. 9587/Del/2019, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) is bad both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A), erred both on facts and in law in arbitrarily and mechanically upholding addition of Rs. 6,17,600/- Page | 2 made by AO by ad hoc estimating agricultural income without considering the fact that no incriminating document seized during search action conducted at premises of the appellant which could prove that appellant has shown unexplained income in the guise of agricultural income. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A), erred both on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs 6,17,600/- made by AO by ad hoc estimating agricultural income by relying upon the order of Hon’ble ITAT passed in case of Shri Malook Nagar without giving any independent finding in the appellant’s case while the appellant has duly substantiated agriculture operation carried out on agricultural land by submitting land revenue record. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A), erred both on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs 6,17,600/- made by AO by ad-hoc estimating agricultural income in absence of sufficient evidence to substantiate the earning from agriculture and ignoring the fact that the appellant has furnished various documents / evidences whose veracity were not doubted. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the Ld. AO arbitrary estimated agriculture income at Rs. 1,17,400/- instead of Rs. 735,000/-, which leads to net agriculture loss of Rs. 18,300/- (1,17,400 less 1,35,700), without considering the agriculture expenses of Rs. 1,35,700/- claimed by the appellant whose veracity were not doubted.” 4. The assessee belongs to “Nagar Dairy Group” wherein an action u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 17.09.2010. Order of assessment u/s 144 of the I.T. Act was passed on 28.03.2013 by making an addition of Rs.7,35,000/- by treating agricultural income as undisclosed income. The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14.07.2014 sustained the addition and subsequently the Tribunal vide order dated 22.12.2017 set aside the matter to the AO to decide the matter afresh. In compliance to the order of the ITAT, notices were issued on 26.07.2018 and on 20.09.2018 and assessment has been completed on 26.12.2018 against which the order of ld. CIT(A) has been Page | 3 passed on 10.10.2019. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. 5. Before us, at page no. 58 of the paper book, the assessee has submitted the receipts of the agricultural income of Rs.7,35,000/- for the year and page no. 59 reflecting expenses of Rs.1,35,700/- on account of agricultural activities. From page no. 60 to 71 are the receipts of sale of agricultural product in kgs with regard to wheat and rice. Page no. 72 to 75 are the khatauni information pertaining to the land. Page nos. 76 to 82 are the information with regard to crops grown by the revenue authorities. Hence, in view of the evidences produced by the assessee which could not be controverted by the revenue, the disallowance made on account of agricultural income is liable to be deleted. 6. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 28/12/2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Yogesh Kumar US) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 28/12/2022 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR