PONMARI ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2751/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Ponmari Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-20, confirming an addition of Rs.28,90,390 to the assessee's income under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, pertaining to agricultural income. The Assessing Officer had initially added the entire declared agricultural income of Rs.33,58,954 as unaccounted income due to lack of sufficient details. The CIT(A) reduced this amount after estimating the actual agricultural income based on the land holding and yield of coconut trees. The Tribunal found that the assessee had relevant evidence, including sales bills and documentation of other crops, which warranted a re-examination of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361348 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: K. VSHWA PADMANABHAN; C.A
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी जॉज जॉज क े, उपा एवं \u0019ी जगदीश, लेखा सद' क े सम BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2751/Chny/2024 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ponmari Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.1722, 6th Avenue, Anna Nagar West, Chennai – 600 040. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai. [PAN: AACCP 7597G] (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri K. Vshwa Padmanabhan, C.A IJथG की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-20 [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 27.09.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [A.O] u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 31.12.2019. ITA No.2751/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: 2. The only effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.28,90,390/- u/s. 68 of the Act pertaining to agriculture income. 3. The assessee has filed a return of income declaring total income of Rs.2,55,650/- and also declared agriculture income of Rs.33,58,954/- in the return of income. The A.O has made the addition of agriculture income of Rs.33,58,954/- as unaccounted income of the assessee as the assessee has not been able to provide the details of the agriculture income. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) examined the land holding of the assessee and submission made in support of agriculture income and estimated the yield of coconut tree grown and arrived at agriculture income of Rs. 4,68,564/-. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs. 28,90,390/- out of Rs. 33,58,954/- made by the assessee. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that the assessee owns 26 acres of land and the agriculture income shown has been duly accounted in the books of account. The Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee has shown agriculture income of Rs. 49,95,724/- in A.Y 2014-15, Rs. 54,65,200/- in A.Y 2015-16 and Rs. 49,00,000/- in AY 2016-17, which has been accepted by the ITA No.2751/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: Department. The Ld. AR therefore contended that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified to estimate the income when the income was properly recorded in the books of account. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee has furnished only ledger extracts of entries, and failed to provide supporting evidence such as sales bills or invoices to prove that the income was from agricultural produce. Additionally, the assessee did not submit evidence of having grown other crops, nor any documentation showing the names of purchasers or proof of sale of produce and all sales recorded in boos are in cash. However, before us, the Ld. AR submitted that all relevant evidence, including sales bills/invoices and documentation showing that other crops were grown on 6.77 acres of land are available. The Ld. AR has also submitted that similar agriculture income offered has been accepted by department in preceding years. In light of this, we are of the view that the matter requires re-examination. Therefore, we remit the issue back ITA No.2751/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: to the file of the A.O. to determine the agriculture income afresh after providing proper opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings and appear before the A.O. on the scheduled hearing date without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced on 23rd May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज जॉज क े) (George George K) उपा / Vice President (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 23rd May, 2025. EDN/- आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF "