Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1888 - AT - Income TaxAddition of claim of sundry creditors - addition u/s 69A - Assessee has not maintained books of accounts - HELD THAT:- AO in the order has noted that assessee has not maintained the books of accounts and the case of the assessee is that he is assessed under presumptive tax u/s 44AE of the Act. The fact is that the turnover declared by the assessee has not been doubted or disturbed by the Revenue. Co-ordinate Bench of Chandigarh Tribunal in the case of Nand Lal Popli [2016 (6) TMI 883 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] has held that where profits declared by the assessee under presumptive taxation was accepted, AO could not make separate addition by invoking provisions of Sec.69C of the Act. Before us, Revenue has not placed any contrary binding decision in its support nor has pointed out as to how the decision in the case of Nand Lal Popli (supra) are not applicable to the present facts - therefore relying on the aforesaid decision of Nand Lal Popli (supra) hold that no addition can be made u/s 69A in the present case and therefore direct its deletion. Thus the ground of assessee is allowed Addition being agricultural income - AO held that assessee has taken shelter of agricultural income to explain the unexplained investment in purchase of flat - HELD THAT:- Assessee had claimed agricultural income which was held to be “income from other sources” by the AO as according to him assessee could not prove the genuineness of claim - assessee had claimed agricultural income in AY 2009-10 and the claim of the assessee was accepted in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Before me, it is assessee’s contention that the area of land in the year under consideration has not reduced and assessee had also placed on record the copy of 7/12 extract to prove the ownership of land and sample sale patties. The aforesaid contention of the assessee has not been controverted by Revenue. In such a situation, when the Ld.CIT(A) has accepted the agricultural income at ₹ 1,08,000/- and against which Revenue is not in appeal then on such facts, the contention of the assessee cannot be discarded without there being any material on record to prove that the claim of assessee is wrong - therefore set aside the order of LD.CIT(A) to the extent of ₹ 70,110/- which has been disallowed by Ld.CIT(A). Thus, the ground of assessee is allowed.
|