Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 464 - ITAT PUNEAddition of agricultural income – AO was of the view that the assessee had declared excess agricultural income and treated the income as undisclosed income – Held that:- CIT(A) was rightly of the view that the AO did not utilize the opportunity provided to him by the office to examine the parties to whom sales were made - The purpose of a remand is to ensure that adequate opportunity is provided to both parties to examine the case and put forth both views in the shortest period of time – as decided in assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment year, it has been held that the AO had wrongly inferred from the material produced before him that the method of accounting for sale of flowers was incorrect or that the alleged discrepancies were addressed to the assessee asking for an explanation for the same. CIT(A) rightly held that allegation that the sale patties are doubtful, does not have any merit – the AO did not have sufficient evidence to reject the production figures returned by assessee in respect of agricultural products, crops and flowers and treated the part of income from other sources - revenue authorities have not disputed the land holding i.e. 40.03 hectors of assessee and agricultural activity - a similar addition made in AY 2004-05 was deleted by CIT(A) and revenue have not preferred appeal against the same - in AY 2006-07, agricultural income on the same holding has been accepted by the AO – thus, the CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition – the order of the CIT(A) is upheld – Decided against revenue.
|