TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as drawn from the partnership firm, besides agricultural income of ₹ 6,55,000. The Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasons while coming to the conclusion that this amount of ₹ 15 lakhs withdrawn from the partnership firm cannot be linked to the investments made in purchase of house sites and accordingly rejected the contention of the assessee. The availability of ₹ 6,55,000 having been accepted no further addition was made except confirming the addition of ₹ 15 lakhs under section 69 of the Act. No infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. With regard to source of agricultural income, it is not in dispute that the land is not in the name of the assessee and there is no proof that assessee earned agricu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e action of the A.O. in charging interest u/s.234A and u/s. 234B of the I.T. Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 2. Facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are stated in brief. The assessee, in her individual capacity, declared taxable income of ₹ 1,81,757 + agricultural income of ₹ 6,55,000. Since there were transactions of immovable properties valuing ₹ 99,25,000, as per valuation of Sub-Registrar s Office, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and accordingly, several notices were issued to the assessee to furnish details with regard to the purchase cost of the land, source for purchase of the land as well as proof of earning agricultural income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rieved, it was contended before the CIT(A) that the A.O. erred in making the best judgment assessment under section 144 of the Act and further contended that no case was made out for making the impugned additions under section 69/68 of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has not complied with the notices issued from time to time though number of opportunities were given and hence, the A.O. was justified in invoking the provisions of Section 144 of the Act. As regards investment in house sites, the assessee contended that a sum of ₹ 15 lakhs had been drawn from the partnership firm M/s. Sri Vari Enterprises which was assessed to income tax by the same Assessment Officer. As regards the balance of the investment, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m of agricultural income. Just holding of land is not enough to claim that the assessee has actually earned the agricultural income. Reliance was placed upon the decision of ITAT in the case of Paras Collins Distilleries wherein the Bench observed that the primary onus is upon the assessee to place before the A.O. proper material to prove that agricultural income was earned and it cannot be based on mere income certificate of the Village Officer. Ld. CIT(A) further added that in the instant case the assessee has not even furnished the land documents and hence claim cannot be entertained even on this count. He thus confirmed the action of the A.O. Further aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. In the grounds of appeal, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thdrawals and agricultural income. As per the information furnished before the A.O. an amount of ₹ 15 lakhs was drawn from the partnership firm, besides agricultural income of ₹ 6,55,000. The Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasons while coming to the conclusion that this amount of ₹ 15 lakhs withdrawn from the partnership firm cannot be linked to the investments made in purchase of house sites and accordingly rejected the contention of the assessee. The availability of ₹ 6,55,000 having been accepted no further addition was made except confirming the addition of ₹ 15 lakhs under section 69 of the Act. I do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 11. Similarly, with regard to sourc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
