Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 590 - ITAT SURATAgriculture Income - genuineness and proof of agricultural activities - AO disallowed the entire agriculture income by taking view that agriculture income is not supported with reliable documentary evidences and in other years the assessee has shown less agriculture income - HELD THAT:- The agriculture income was treated as non-genuine. CIT(A) granted partial relief to the assessee by taking view that in subsequent years the assessee has shown similar income in AY 2018-19 and 2019-20. CIT(A) on the basis of agriculture income declared in AY 2019-20, granted relief to that extent. Before Tribunal the assessee has filed various documents to substantiate the agriculture income, however, the basic evidence to substantiate such income i.e. the evidence of holding of agriculture land is not filed either before assessing officer, or before CIT(A) or before me. During hearing of appeal as raised very specific question that how, much agriculture land is owned by the assessee. Assessee fairly accepted that he does not have any evidence with him to show that the assessee owned agriculture holding. Thus, in absence of such basic and primary evidence, find no merit in submissions of assessee to extent any further relief, in addition to the relief granted by ld CIT(A) in absence of ownership of the land. In the result, this ground of appeal is dismissed. Additions of cash deposits - AO made the additions of cash deposits by taking view that during the demonetization period the assessee made deposit during demonetization period - HELD THAT:- As recorded above before ld CIT(A) the assessee retreated that he has received Gift from sister of his mother. Assessee also filed gift deed executed by the donor, however, CIT(A) not accepted such gift deed by taking view that why the donor kept such cash amount with her. We find that the ld CIT(A) has neither made any investigation of fact before discarding the gift not sought any remand report from the assessing officer. And as such the evidence in the form of gift deed was discarded without bringing any evidence against such evidence. Thus, accept the gift as genuine. So far as other remaining receipt and receipt of Sound system is concerned find that CBDT in its instruction No. 3/2017 [F.NO.225/100/2017/ITA-II], Dated 21-2-2017, has issued standard operating procedure (SOP) that cash deposits up may be accepted in case of individual, thus, by giving benefit of the above circular, hence, the addition to the extent is also deleted from disallowance. Thus, the assessee is allowed total relief of Rs. 3.50 lakhs and Rs. 2.50 lakhs against the total addition of Rs. 10,00,500/-. And on remaining addition as concurred with the finding of ld CIT(A) that no such rental income was shown by assessee prior to 25.07.2016 and after 24.10.2016 and there were discrepancies in the cash book. In the result, this ground of appeal is partly allowed.
|