9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 662X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- made by the learned AO on account of alleged undisclosed income introduced in the form of agricultural income. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in reducing the agricultural income by Rs. 2,67,932/- without any basis or without considering the submission and credible evidences submitted by the assessee. 3. The assessee craves your indulgence to add amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing." The only issue arises in this appeal of the assessee is regarding agricultural income to the extent of Rs. 2,67,932/- was treated as undisclosed income by the ld. CIT (A). 2. The assessee is a company and stated to have engaged in the agricultural acti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /-, it is pertinent to note that the assessee has shown gross agricultural income of Rs. 32,72,999/- which includes Rs. 4,80,000/- as sale of trees. Therefore, the gross agricultural income shown by the assessee from the agricultural operation is Rs. 27,92,999/- against which the assessee has claimed expenditure of Rs. 1,38,120/-. Thus the expenditure claimed by the assessee is around 4.9% which is beyond the imagination of percentage of expenditure for earning the agricultural income. Therefore, the claim of the assessee is found to be unrealistic and the ld. CIT (Appeals) has considered this issue in para 2.3 to 2.3.3 as under :- "2.3. I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. Grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trict the expenses to 15% against 30% taken by the Assessing Officer. Assessee claimed agricultural expenses at Rs. 1,38,120/- against which 15% expenses are held as reasonable. Accordingly income from agricultural produce is worked out at Rs. 23,74,049/- (Rs. 27,92,999 x 85%). Thus total agricultural income comes to Rs. 28,54,049/- (2374049+480000) against Rs. 31,34,879/- declared by the assessee. Addition of Rs. 280830/- is upheld. This ground of appeal is partly allowed." Thus it is clear that the ld. CIT (A) has taken a reasonable percentage of 15% expenditure of the gross agricultural income and that too the agricultural income from agricultural operations excluding the income from sale of trees. Hence, in the facts and circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
