JACINTHA PRASAD PANICKER,MANGALORE V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), MANGALORE

MA 59/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application by Mrs. Jacintha Prasad Panicker, the assessee, against an earlier order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The dispute centered on the Tribunal's previous decision to average the agricultural income over six years to determine the taxable income for the year in question. The assessee contended that the Tribunal had not addressed all her grounds of appeal and misinterpreted the non-taxability of agricultural income under the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal, however, maintained that their directive to the AO was merely to ascertain the correct agricultural income and did not constitute a direction to tax it.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668728 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARITHIVEL V
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVISHANKAR
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 59/Bang/2024 (in ITA No. 263/Bang/2024) Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mrs. Jacintha Prasad Panicker, 3-5-502 Empress, Kadri Temple New Road, Kadri, Mangalore – 575 004. Karnataka. PAN: AACTS7624Q Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(4), Mangaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Parithivel .V, JCIT – DR Date of Hearing : 24-01-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26-06-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER This is a miscellaneous application filed by the assessee as against the order passed by this Tribunal in ITA No. 263/Bang/2024 dated 16/04/2024. Page 2 of 3 M.A. No. 59/Bang/2024 (in ITA No. 263/Bang/2024) 2. In the miscellaneous application, the assessee submitted that the Tribunal had not adjudicated all the grounds of appeal filed by the petitioner and also gave a finding that “We accede to the request of the ld.A.R. Accordingly, the issue in dispute is remitted to the file of ld.AO to examine the agricultural income declared by the assessee in immediate 3 earlier assessment years and also immediate 3 subsequent assessment years and average the same and consider the average agricultural income of these 6 assessment years as agricultural income of this assessment year 2017-18. Ordered accordingly.” which is not correct since the agricultural income is not liable to be taxed under the provisions of the Act. 3. We have considered the said findings given by the Tribunal in which this Tribunal had took a lenient view and granted the benefit by directing the AO to estimate the agricultural income by taking the average of the three earlier and subsequent years’ income shown by the assessee. The said leniency was shown to the assessee in spite of the fact that the assessee had not produced any supporting evidences to show that the said income is an agricultural income. But the Tribunal had accepted the said contention of the assessee that the said income is an agricultural income but in order to arrive the correct income, as requested by the assessee, there was a direction issued to the AO to take the agricultural income reported in the earlier three assessment years and the subsequent 3 assessment years and thereafter arrived the average of the agricultural income in respect of the assessment year 2017-18. Nowhere in the order, this Tribunal had given a finding that the same should be subjected to tax. When the Tribunal had given a finding that the correct income should be ascertained by following the above said method, it does not mean that the income should be taxed in the hands of the assessee. Once the AO had arrived the agricultural income, then naturally, the AO would see whether the same is eligible for exemption or not. Page 3 of 3 M.A. No. 59/Bang/2024 (in ITA No. 263/Bang/2024) 4. We are, therefore, of the view that there is no direction to assess the said agricultural income by this Tribunal and therefore there is no error in the order passed by this Tribunal. We, therefore dismiss the said application filed by the assessee. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 26th June, 2025. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A) By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "