NARESH CHAUHAN V. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL

ITA/63/2016

AI Insights

The case involves Naresh Chauhan, the appellant, contesting the treatment of his agricultural income as an undisclosed source by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant argued that his agricultural income, which had been accepted in previous and subsequent years, was unjustly treated as undisclosed in the year 2008-2009. The respondent, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, upheld this treatment. The High Court, upon reviewing the submissions and the records, noted that the appellant's explanations and the banking transactions supporting the agricultural income were not adequately considered by the lower authorities. Consequently, the court decided to remand the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 747783 (HC-HIMACHAL_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VINAY KUTHIALA; DIWAN SINGH NEGI
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHAL MOHAN
• Keywords: Agriculture income; Assessment; Income tax appellate tribunal; Perversity; Undisclosed source
• Section: 153(A)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA No.63 of 2016 Date of Decision: 30th October, 2018 Naresh Chauhan ......Appellant Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, HSIDC Bhawan, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon. ……Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Vishal Mohan, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate, for the respondent. Sanjay Karol, Judge (oral). The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law : a) Whether the ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law and facts in upholding the treating of agriculture income as undisclosed source when the claim of the appellant has not been negated and moreover, agriculture income more than the said amount has been accepted in the preceding and succeeding assessment years? b) Whether the order of the ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal suffers from perversity because it has failed to appreciate that it was an assessment framed under Section 153-A and for making an addition finding of any incrementing material supporting the said addition was sine qua non? c) Whether the ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law and facts in penalizing the appellant for rectifying his error and enhancing agriculture income under Section 153-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2. During the course of hearing, Mr. Vishal Mohan, learned counsel for the appellant, invited our attention to the factual matrix, which according to him, the authorities below erred in accounting for and appreciating while passing the order and as such prayed that substantial question of law No. (a) be considered and decided leaving substantial questions of law No. (b) and ( c ) open. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, learned Senior Counsel states that no question of law much less substantial questions of law arises in the present appeal. 4. Having carefully gone through the orders, passed by the authorities below and more specifically, the Commissioner of Income Tax and Income Tax Tribunal, Division Bench, Chandigarh, we are of the considered view that there is perversity in the impugned order inasmuch as contentions raised by the appellant, furnishing explanation, perhaps plausible with regard to increase in the amount of agricultural income in the relevant year i.e. assessment year 2008-2009 stands not considered by the authority below. Agricultural income alleged to have been generated from agricultural produce was through a proper banking channel, from the persons whose particulars stood disclosed. Even in the previous and succeeding years similar income was there from such source. 5. From the bare reading of the order (s), it cannot be said that all this stands considered and as such, on this short ground alone, we quash and set aside the impugned order dated 8.1.2015, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon and the matter is 3 remanded back to the Commissioner, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Division Bench, Chandigarh, for consideration of the matter afresh. Ordered accordingly. Substantial question of law No.(a) is answered accordingly. 6. The present appeal stands disposed of, so also pending applications, if any. (Sanjay Karol) Judge (Chander Bhusan Barowalia) 30th October, 2018 Judge (brb & CS) "