9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 679X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vinced with the reasons stated in the petition and therefore, we condone the delay. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. During the search operation conducted under section 132 of the Act in the case of Sri D.Nagarjuna Rao and others on 29.10.2007 certain incriminating documents pertaining to transaction in immovable properties made by the assessee were seized. Consequent to the same, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 153C read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, calling for the returns of income for different assessment years. In response to the such notice, issued for A.Y. 2002-03, the assessee has filed the return of income on 23.12.2008 admitting income of Rs.49,000/-. 4. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The learned A.R. relied on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijaybhai N. Chandrani vs. ACIT (2010) 231 CTR 474 and submitted that no action can be initiated under section 153C of the Act, unless there is material found during the course of search. The CIT(A) discussed elaborately at paras 4.2 to 4.6 of his order and rejected the additional ground raised by the assessee. 7. With respect to the merits in the written submissions filed by the learned A.R. on 10.10.2011, it was submitted that the Assessing Officer is not correct in not accepting the opening balance shown by the assessee and treating the same as NIL. It was admitted that during the assessment proceedings, assessee had filed evidence of land holdings and that she ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the extent of ac.3.78 cents in Srikakulam District. The CIT(A) held that subsequently the assessee had requested the Tahsildar, Srikakulam towards issue of certificate in her favour which clearly shows that there is no evidence with her for actual earning of agricultural income from such land owned by her and therefore, rejected the claim of the assessee of accumulated balance of Rs.2,95,000/- from agricultural income. The CIT(A) further held that from the circular dated 6.3.2010 issued by the concerned Tahsildar, Srikakulam District merely states that the annual agricultural income of Smt. Sarapu Indira Devi is estimated to Rs.45,360/-. The Tahsildar concerned has referred to various lands located in different survey numbers aggregati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od of time for an average extent of ac.3.78cents could be reasonably estimated at Rs.2.95 lakhs. 14. The learned D.R. on the other hand, submitted that the patta passbook does not mention the land to be 'Wet' land whereas, it is 'Metta' i.e., it is clearly a 'Dry' land and the crop grown is groundnut which is not high income yielding crop. 15. We have heard both the parties. We are of the opinion that even though there may be difference of opinion as to the amount of agricultural income which could be obtained from the land and the lack of evidence produced with respect to the same, the issue of Assessing Officer not accepting the opening balance and treating the same as NIL is incorrect. The CIT(A) has also confirmed the Order of the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
