Shri Devjibhai Dhanjibhai Gabani(HUF), Surat v. The Income tax Officer, Ward-9(1),, Surat

ITA 1249/AHD/2007 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 124920514 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AABHD3018C
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1249/AHD/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant Shri Devjibhai Dhanjibhai Gabani(HUF), Surat
Respondent The Income tax Officer, Ward-9(1),, Surat
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 22-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 19-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 19-01-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 23-03-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI J.M. AND SHRI A.N.PAHUJ A A.M. ITA NO.1249/AHD/2007 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-2004 DEVJIBHAI DHANJIBHAI GABANI (HUF) 68-69 VALLABHNAGAR SOCIETY VARACHHA ROAD SURAT. V/S I.T.O. WARD:9(1) SURAT AYAKAR BHAVAN MAJURA GATE SURAT. PAN NO. AABHD 3018 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE: SHRI D.K.PARIKH A.R FOR DEPARTMENT: SHRI C.K.MISHRA SR.DR O R D E R PER SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-V SURAT DATED 07/12/2006 FOR ASST. Y EAR 2003-2004. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE P ARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSI DERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUND NO.1 AND 4. GROUND NO.5 IS GENERAL. THESE GR OUNDS ARE THEREFORE DISMISSED BEING NOT PRESSED. ON GROUND N O.2 ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE DISALLOWANCE OF GROSS AGRICULTURAL R ECEIPT OF RS.1 58 217/- AND ON GROUND NO.3 CHALLENGED THE AD DITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED SHOWN UNDER AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF R S.3 10 941/-. 2 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING INCOME OF RS.68 316/-. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER NOTED NATURE OF BUSINESS OF ASSESSEE TO BE RENTAL I NCOME INTEREST AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE AMOUNTING TO RS.5 38 850/-. PB2 IS THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME SHOWING RENTAL INCOME INTEREST INCOME AND FOR COMP UTATION OF TAX PURPOSES AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS SHOWN. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE EVIDENCES IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES INCURRED AND CLAIM OUT OF GROSS AGRICULTUR AL RECEIPT. SELF MADE VOUCHERS WERE PRODUCED. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIM ED SALE OF VEGETABLES AMOUNTING TO RS.1 58 217/- TO 3 PERSONS. BOOK RESULTS WERE ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN T OTAL GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.9 21 318/- OUT OF THE SAID RECEIPTS AN AMOUNT OF RS.7 63 101/- WAS CLAIMED FROM M/S. CHALTHAL VIBHAG KHAND UDHYOG MANDALI LTD. FOR THE SALE OF SUGARCANE CROPS AND RE MAINING AMOUNT OF RS.1 58 217/- WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FRO M 3 PERSONS FROM SALE OF THE VEGETABLES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENDITURE OF THE SALE ARE NOT PRODUCED. ONLY VOUCHERS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED. ADDITION OF RS.1 58 217/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME EARNED FROM OTHER THAN AGRICULTU RAL ACTIVITIES. FURTHER ADDITION OF RS.3 10 941/- WAS MADE TREATING THE UNEXPLAINED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOUR CES. IT WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE LEARNED C.I.T.(APPEALS) THAT TRANS ACTIONS ARE GENUINE FOR SALE OF VEGETABLES AS WELL AS SALE OF T HE SUGARCANE AND IN THE PAST ALSO ON THE SAME BASIS AGRICULTURAL INCOM E HAS BEEN ACCEPTED. HE HAS FILED COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING PURCHASE OF THE VEGETABLES BY THE THREE PERSONS. HOWEVER LEARNED C .I.T.(APPEALS) DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DISMI SSED THESE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE S UBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THA T ASSESSEE HAS 3 ONLY AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND OTHER ARE ASCERTAINED SOURCES BEING RENTAL INCOME AND INTEREST INCOME THEREFORE ADDITI ONS ARE CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED. ON THE OTHER HAND LEARNED DR RELIED U PON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATER IAL ON RECORD WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ISSUE IS SQUARELY C OVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH IN THE CASE OF GOPALBHAI V . BHOIWALA ITA NO.3008/AHD/2009 IN ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-2005 DATED 8.01.2010 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD : 8. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IT IS CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE HAS APART FROM AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND HAS INTEREST INCOME ON THE FDR AND POSTAL MONTHLY INCOME FROM THE KNOWN SOURCES. THE I NCOME FROM THESE SOURCES ARE SPECIFIC AND ASCERTAINED. THEREFO RE THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT WITH THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WHICH IS EXEMPT. THE ABOVE DECISIONS OF ITAT INDORE BENC H IN THE CASE OF SMT. SHAHENAJ BANO (SUPRA) AND NARENDRA BAD JATIYA (SUPRA) ARE CLEARLY APPLICABLE TO THE ABOVE CASE. S INCE THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD THAT ASSESSEE HA S INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES ALSO THEREFORE THERE IS NOT RE ASON TO SUSTAIN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.1 50 000/-. 6. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE ORDER IT IS CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE HAS RENTAL AND INT EREST INCOME WHICH IS ASCERTAINED. ASSESSEE HAS NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME EXCEPT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD AS TO WHAT WAS THE OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BEING INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE BOTH TH E ADDITION ARE UNJUSTIFIED AND ARE LIABLE TO BE DELETED. BY FOLLOW ING THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WE DELETE BOTH THE ADDITION OF RS.1 5 8 217/- AND RS.3 10 941/-. AS A RESULT GROUND NO.2 AND 3 OF TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 4 7. AS A RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND JANUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- (A.N.PAHUJA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 22-01-2010 PARAS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE RESPONDENT 2. THE DCIT (APPELLANT). 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-V SURAT 5. THE DR ITAT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// DY.R/AR ITA T AHMEDABAD