Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 121 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153A - Held that:- In all the three assessment years i.e. 2005-06 to 2007-08, the date for issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act already stands expired and no notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued prior to the date of search, thus, the assessment under section 143(1) of the Act attained finality and, therefore, all the three assessment years are treated as completed assessments. In respect of assessment years 2005-06 to 2007-08, the assessments had already attained finality before the date of search and no incriminating material was found or seized from the premises of the assessee, and, thus, respectfully following the finding of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT) no addition could have been made in these assessment years. As no additions could have been made, other grounds of appeal challenging the merit of the addition, both in the appeal of the assessee as well as in the appeal of the Revenue, are rendered infructuous. Treating the agricultural income earned by the appellant as unexplained income - Held that:- CIT(A) has not appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case properly and rejected the entire claim of agricultural income of the assessee, ignoring the land holding of the assessee. In our opinion, in view of land holding and “Land Revenue” records of sowing crops over the land, some agricultural income cannot be denied and in such circumstances, we have no alternative other than estimation of agricultural income. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel it appropriate to restrict agriculture income of ₹ 10,000 per acre and, thus, according to the land holding of approx. 15 acres, the agriculture income of the assessee is restricted to ₹ 1,50,000/- and balance agriculture income shown by the assessee is held as undisclosed income of the assessee. The grounds No. 1 to 3 of the appeal are accordingly partly allowed. Addition on unexplained entries appearing in bank account and deemed dividend - admission of additional evidence by CIT-A- Held that:- CIT-(A) has not complied with the provisions of Rule 46A(3) of the Rules and accepted the genuineness of the explanation of the assessee on the basis of inference drawn on the submission of the Assessing Officer in the remand report. We find that the Assessing Officer clearly asked for opportunity to examine the additional evidences, which the Ld. CIT-A did not allow to the Assessing Officer - we feel it appropriate to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT-(A) for complying the provisions of Rule 46A(3) of the Rules
|