9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act in respect of allege unexplained cash deposits. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the A.O in treating the agricultural income of Rs. 3,98,939 claimed as exempt u/s 10(1) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of dealing in derivatives, futures and options and derives income from agricultural activities of growing flowers. The assessee filed the return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 29.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. (-) 50,95,548/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. In response, the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erification of bills and vouchers M/s. Sankalp Farms name is mentioned, where the assessee is a partner. The A.O observed that there is no agricultural activity carried out by the assessee and could not substantiate the income. Further the submissions of the assessee are that the expenditure has been proportionately allocated to the assessee on the basis of land sharing ratio. The assessee has not discharged the burden of proof with evidences in respect of generation of the receipts from the agricultural activities and also expenditure incurred for the purpose of cultivation. Therefore, the A.O. is of the opinion that the cash deposits in the ICICI bank account are unexplained and made addition u/s 68 of the Act and the agricultural income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... antiated his submissions with the paper book. Further, the Ld.AR, emphasized that the assessee is regularly filing the return of income disclosing agricultural income but in the present assessment year, the A.O has treated agriculture income as non genuine and referred to the apportionment of income statement of family and prayed for allowing the appeal. 5. Contra, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The Ld. AR emphasized that the A.O and CIT(A) have erred in denying the sources of agricultural income generated out of the agriculture activities. The assessee and her family members are partners in M/s Sankalp Farms and the brand name of the firm is used by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Ld. AR referred to the flower photographs and page 133 of the paper book, relevant to the A.Y 2012-13 where the income has been agricultural income apportioned between the partners and M/S Sankalp Farm. The Ld. AR demonstrated the income tax returns filed for the earlier assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12, where the share of profit of partnership firm and the agricultural income was disclosed. Further for the A.Y 2009-10, the case was selected for scrutiny and order u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed The Ld. AR also demonstrated the financial statements of M/s Sankalp Farms at page 17 to 23 of the paper book. Considering the overall facts and the evidences filed as reiterated by the Ld. AR, the information submitted by the assessee cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
