Agricultural Income under the Income Tax Act

This Income Tax Appellate Tribunal case involves an appeal by Gutta Narasimha Reddy concerning his agricultural income for the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal challenges an addition of Rs. 24,17,633/- made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that evidence of agricultural land holdings and income was provided to support expenditure, and that the assessment was completed without adequate opportunity to furnish explanations. The tribunal condoned a 19-day delay in the appeal filing.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)

BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 953/HYD/2018
Assessment Year: 2009-10

Gutta Narasimha Reddy,
Ramannapet
[PAN: ARDPG6155C]
(Appellant) 

Vs

The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1,
Suryapet
(Respondent)

For Assessee : NONE
For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Date of Hearing : 17-05-2021
Date of Pronouncement : 01-07-2021

O R D E R

PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for AY.2009-10 arises from the CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad’s order dated 19-01-2018 passed in case No.0441/ITO-W-1/SYP/CIT(A)-3/2016-17, in proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. None appeared at assessee’s behest. Case file perused.

2. It transpires at the outset that this assessee’s instant appeal suffers from 19 days delay stated to be attributable to the reason(s) beyond his control as per condonation petition/affidavit. No rebuttal has come from the departmental side. The impugned delay is condoned therefore. 

3. The assessee has pleaded the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), erred in upholding the addition of Rs.24,17,633/- made by the Assessing Officer.

3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the assessee furnished evidence in support of the agricultural land holdings and income there from in support of the sources for availability of money towards expenditure incurred on assessee's share of consideration paid at the time of execution of agreement cum GPA on 15-12-2008 and accordingly the learned C.I.T(Appeals) ought not to have summarily rejected the evidence and explanations offered by the assessee.

4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee for furnishing explanations and evidences in support of the sources towards assessee's share of consideration paid at the time of execution of agreement cum GPA on 15-12-2008 and even without considering the deduction claimed u/s.80C and accordingly the learned C.I.T(Appeals) ought not to have summarily rejected the evidence and explanations offered by the assessee”.

4. The CIT(A)’s detailed discussion affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the impugned addition reads as under:

“VIII) Ground Nos.2 and 4 relates to agricultural income and their sources. The facts of the case, grounds of appeal, assessment order and submissions of the appellant were perused. It is seen from the submission filed in appeal that an agricultural income certificates of the Revenue Department, Government of Telangana were furnished. Scanned certificate of one such agricultural income certificate is below: 

To know more in details find the attachment file