TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is always an element of subjectivity in estimation. However, if it can be made out that the estimate is without any basis or is totally lacking the bona fides and only then the Assessing Officer would be justified in substituting his estimate in place of the estimation of agricultural income done by the assessee. There is no such situation in this case – addition can not be made. - 166 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 12-5-2008 - RAJIVE BHALLA and RAKESH KUMAR GARG JJ. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, for the appellant. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J. - The revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide order dated 21.8.2007. While allowing the appeal, the Tribunal held that the assessee, who is an agriculturist, has produced evidence on record, in support of his claim and income declared by him on estimate basis is bona fide. The findings of the Tribunal in this regard are reproduced:- "I have considered the rival submissions carefully. Firstly, it is abundantly clear from the record that the assessee has declared agricultural income in the past also. The factum of the assessee being engaged in the activity yielding agricultural income in the past as well as during the year under consideration is not in dispute. The dispute essentially revolves around the quantum of agricultural income declared for the reason that the assessee doe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee in support of the estimate is also wrong for the reason that there is no finding much less a whisper that the material sought to be relied upon by the assessee was lacking in credibility. In fact the certificate of average income per acre of land obtained from village 'Patwari' which indicates an income level of Rs.36,000/- per acre, cannot be brushed aside. Moreover, the assessee submitted the 'J-forms' evidencing sale of agricultural produce but subjecting the same to microscopic scrutiny to cull out the yield etc. is an unjustified exercise. What the Assessing Officer was to essentially do was to only verify the estimates made by the assessee. No doubt, there is always an element of subjectivity in estimation. Unless it can be ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel for the revenue, has argued that the agricultural income declared by the assessee was on an estimate basis and the same was on the higher side considering the yield available from the land in question and therefore, the findings of the Tribunal are perverse and are based upon conjectures and surmises and the findings of the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have been ignored without any written material on record. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the revenue and perused the record. 7. We find no merit in the contention raised by the counsel for the revenue-appellant. The Tribunal has given a pure finding of fact after considering the evidence on record with regard to the agricultural inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
