Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 1109 - ITAT MUMBAIAddition of agricultural income - Admission of additional evidence to substantiate agriculture activities of assessee - HELD THAT:- During the hearing, AR placed on record the surveyors’ report, wherein the land used for agriculture activities, types of trees, and other activities are mentioned. Accordingly, the learned AR submitted that the land measuring 66.8135 Hector was used for the plantation of mango, cashew, coconut, pineapple, banana, jackfruit, chikoo, jamun, bamboo, and animal feeding plantation. Thus, it is the claim of the assessee that apart from the 7/12 extract the aforesaid surveyors’ report also justifies the claim of the assessee that an amount of Rs. 22.70 lakh is the agriculture income of the assessee. Since the aforesaid document, now placed as additional evidence, was not considered by any of the lower authorities, therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the jurisdictional AO for de novo adjudication after consideration of the additional document furnished by the assessee - We also direct the AO to conduct thorough verification/examination of all the aspects pertaining to the claim of income as agricultural income - As a result, ground no. 1 raised in assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. LTCG - Exemption u/s 54F - claim denied as vacant and peaceful possession of the residential house is not handed over to the assessee as full and final consideration is not paid - During the hearing, in support of the claim that the assessee is the lawful owner of the flat and the share certificate by the Co-operative Housing Society has also been transferred in its name, reference was made to the copy of share certificate issued by Housing Society - HELD THAT:- It is evident from the record that the aforesaid documents have not been considered by the lower authorities and the claim of the assessee was rejected u/s 54F on the basis that the assessee is not the owner of the flat. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the jurisdictional AO for de novo adjudication after consideration of all the material as furnished by the assessee. Appeal by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
|