Sandeep Gulve, Nashik v. ACIT, Cen. Cir. -3, Nashik, Nashik

ITA 248/PUN/2007 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 24824514 RSA 2007
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 248/PUN/2007
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant Sandeep Gulve, Nashik
Respondent ACIT, Cen. Cir. -3, Nashik, Nashik
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 29-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-07-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 09-02-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.NO. ITA NO BLOCK PERIOD APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 248/PN/07 1.4.90 TO 11.1.01 SHRI SANDEEP GOPALRAO GULVE KONDAI BUNGLOW OLD GANGAPUR NAKA NASHIK ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF I.T. CEN. CIR. 3 NASHIK 2 249/PN/07 1.4.90 TO 11.1.01 SMT INDUMATI GOPALRAO GULVE KONDAI BUNGLOW OLD GANGAPUR NAKA NASHIK -DO- 3 250/PN/07 1.4.90 TO 11.1.01 SHRI GOPALRAO R GULVE KONDAI BUNGLOW OLD GANGAPUR NAKA NASHIK -DO- APPELLANTS BY : SHRI PRAMOD SHINGTE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J S NAVRATH ORDER PER G S PANNU A.M : THE CAPTIONED APPEALS RELATE TO ASSESSEES OF THE SAME FAM ILY AND INVOLVE CERTAIN COMMON ISSUES AND THEREFORE THEY WERE HEARD T OGETHER AND A CONSOLIDATED ORDER IS BEING PASSED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENI ENCE AND BREVITY. 2. ALL THE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES OF SAME FAMI LY DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE BUT SIMILAR ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-II NASHIK DATED 24.11.2006 WHICH IN TURN H AVE ARISEN FROM THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 158BC(C) READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) PERTAINING TO THE BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1990 TO 11.1.2001. 3. WE SHALL TAKE UP ITA NO 250/PN/07 FILED BY THE ASSESSE E GOPALRAO R GULVE AS A LEAD CASE. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION WAS CARRIED OUT UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT ON 11.01.20 01 AGAINST THE GULVE GROUP. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH/SEIZURE ACTION VARIO US PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZED WHICH CONSISTED OF (I) CASH OF RS 80 00 0/- OUT OF RS 2 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. 1 17 755/- FOUND (II) JEWELLERY OF RS 5 56 000/- AN D (III) SILVER ARTICLES WORTH RS 30 750/-. PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED BY ISSUANCE OF A N OTICE UNDER SECTION 158BC TO THE ASSESSEE ON 06.07.2001 IN RESPONSE TO WHI CH A RETURN OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN FORM NO. 2 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD WAS FILED ON 08.08.2002 DECLARING THEREIN UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS. NIL FOR THE ENTIRE BLOCK PERIOD. SINCE THE RETURN WAS NOT FILED IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM N O. 2B THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT TREAT THE RETURN FILED IN FORM NO. 2 AS A RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 158BC OF THE ACT. THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED ON 31.0.2003 COMPUTING THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS 35 59 572/-. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) H AS GIVEN PARTIAL RELIEF AND NOT BEING SATISFIED ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL B EFORE US. 4. GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND NEEDS NO ADJ UDICATION. GROUND NO. 2 READS AS UNDER: THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS WH ILE RESTRICTING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR BLOCK PERIOD AT RS 17 00 314/- AS AGAINST RS 20 33 395/- DECLARED BY APPELLANT IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF B LOCK ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED A NUMBER OF INV ESTMENTS IN LANDS AND DEPOSITS IN VARIOUS BANKS. BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY HAD LARGE AGRICULT URAL HOLDINGS AND THE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE OUT OF THE INCOME RECEIVED FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOWEVER WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SOURCES FOR VARIOUS INVESTMENTS IN LAND DEPOSITS ETC. FOUND AND ACCORDINGL Y ASSESSED THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS 35 59 572/- FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD. THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN LANDS PUR CHASED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF FARM HOUSE UNDISCLOSED DEPOSITS WITH ALPBHY UDHARAKAND DURBAL GHATAK PRATISTHAN DEPOSIT IN VARIOUS BANKS ETC. APART TH EREFROM ASSESSEE WAS ALSO FOUND TO EARN UNDISCLOSED INTEREST ON VARIOUS BANK D EPOSITS RENTAL INCOME ETC WHICH WAS ALSO ASSESSED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. IN APPEAL BEF ORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT 3 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE GIVING SET OFF OF AGRICULTURA L INCOME AGAINST UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1993-94 AND 1996-97 DID GIVE SUCH SET OFF FOR OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESS EE. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM OF VAST HOLDING OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND I NCOME THEREFROM ASSESSEE FURNISHED COMPLETE DETAILS OF EXTENT OF LAND HOLDINGS CROPS GROWN YIELD AMOUNTS EARNED AND OTHER DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. AFTE R CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE R ETURNED AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 200 4-05 2005-06 IN HIS REGULAR RETURNS AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THE SAM E AS ALSO THE QUANTUM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR SOME YEARS AT THE TIME OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND FOR OTHER YEARS I N THE REGULAR ASSESSMENTS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ESTIMA TED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS OF TH E BLOCK PERIOD AT RS 17 00 314/- AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE SAID AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR SET OFF AGAINST THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE BLOCK PERIOD. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. BEFORE US THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) WHILE ALLOWING T HE CREDIT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME HAS ESTIMATED THE SAME AT LOWER FIGURES THAN DECLA RED BY THE ASSESSEE RESULTING INTO AN ADDITION OF RS 3 33 081/-. IT WAS SU BMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT ASSESSEE-FAMILY IS PURELY AGRICULTURALIST AND THE MAIN SOURCE OF INCOME IS OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. IT IS CONTENTED TH AT ALL THE INVESTMENTS IN THE AGRICULTURAL LANDS ARE MADE OUT OF THE INCOME RECEIVED FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND IN SUPPORT THEREOF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE CHA RT SHOWING INDIVIDUAL HOLDINGS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AS FOLLOWS: 4 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. THE LEARNED COUNSEL ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX( APPEALS) ON THIS COUNT BE DEL ETED. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE ONLY POINT OF DISPUTE IS THE QUANTUM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME ESTIMATED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD AT RS 17 00 31 4/- AS AGAINST RS 20 33 395/- CANVASSED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER A LSO HAS NOT DISPUTED THE EXISTENCE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND IN F ACT THE ESTIMATION MADE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IN THIS REGARD IS NOT CHALLENGED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE US. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APP EALS) HAS OBSERVED IN PARA 11 THAT IN ESTIMATING AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS 17 00 314/- FOR THE YEARS COMPRISED IN THE BLOCK PERIOD HE HAS CONSIDERED THE QUAN TUM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR SOME YEARS COMPRI SED IN THE BLOCK PERIOD AND FOR OTHER YEARS IN THE REGULAR ASSESSMENTS AND ALSO THE FACT THAT EVIDENCES WERE FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH WHICH INDICA TED AGRICULTURAL INCOMES. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT ORS ENUMERATED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) THE ESTIMATION MAD E BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS FAIR AND PROPER . WE ACCORDINGLY AFFIRM HIS ORDER ON THIS ASPECT. THUS ON THIS GROUND THE ASSESSE E FAILS. SR. NO. NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AREA IN HECTOR AREA IN ACRE AREA IN BIGHA 1 MR. GOPALRAO GULVE 27 HECTOR 11 ARE 72 ACRES 09 ARE 182 BIGHA 2 MRS. INDUMATI GULVE 10 HECTOR 90 ARE 27 ACRES 10 ARE 67.50 BIGHA 3 MR. SANDEEP GULVE 22 HECTOR 72 ARE 56 ACRES 32 ARE 141 BIGHA TOTAL 60 HECTORS 156 ACRES 390.50 BIGHA 5 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. 9. THE NEXT GROUND OF APPEAL READS AS FOLLOWS: THE LD C(T(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS WHILE NOT ACCEPTING APPELLANTS EXPLANATION EGARDING CASH RECEIPT FROM BALWANT TAJA NPURE AND THEREBY CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS 8 23 311/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED NEG ATIVE CASH BALANCE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1991-92 AS PER ANNEXURE A 10. THE BRIEF FACTS IN RELATION TO THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTERS DATED 21.12.2004 AND 5.12.2005 HAD SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS HAD BEEN CO NSIDERED IN THE COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOKS AND HE HAD SUFFICIENT SOURCES. ACCORD ING TO THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE COMPUTERIZE D CASH BOOKS AND MAINTAINED THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS REPRESENTED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE BLOCK PERIOD. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX (APPEALS) MADE AN ANALYSIS OF THE CASH DEPOSITS CONSIDERED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WHICH REVEALED THAT THE MAJOR CASH DEPOSIT WAS RS 7 89 50 0/- MADE DURING THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEAR 1991-92 WITH THE NASHIK PEOPLE CO-OP . BANK. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF CASH RECEIVED FROM SHRI BALWANT TAJANPURE AMOUNTING TO RS 5 50 000/- AND OPE NING BALANCE AS ON 01.04.1991 OF RS 1 50 000/- BASED ON THE ENTRIES IN TH E COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOK. ACCORDING TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) T HE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PROVE THE SOURCES IN RESPECT OF THESE CASH RECEI PTS AND THE OPENING BALANCE SATISFACTORILY EITHER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER OR BEFORE HIM THEREFORE THE AMOUNT OF RS 7 89 500/- WAS THE UNEXPLAINED CASH D EPOSITS REPRESENTING UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEAR 1991-92. HE HOWEVER HELD THAT THIS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS 7 89 500 /- SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR SET OFF FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS. ON THESE FACTS THE COM MISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS) RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE AMOUNT OF THE NEGATIVE FIGURE OF RS 8 23 311/- AS WORKED OUT IN ANNEXURE-A FOR THE BLOCK ASS ESSMENT YEAR 1991-92. AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (AP PEALS) ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 11. ON THIS GROUND THE LEARNED COUNSEL REFERRED TO W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) A COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN 6 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. PLACED AT PAGE 212 OF THE PAPER BOOK TO POINT OUT THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT A SUM OF RS 8 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED BACK ON CAN CELLATION OF AN AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE AND THAT THE SAID MONEY WAS AVA ILABLE TO EXPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSIT IN QUESTION. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LEAR NED COUNSEL THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS INADVERTENTLY N OT CONSIDERED THE SAID PLEA WHICH IS BORNE OUT OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ADDRE SSED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND THEREFORE SU BMITTED THAT THE ISSUE BE SENT BACK TO THE LOWER AUTHORITIES TO BE EXAMINED IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAID PLEA. 12. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REP RESENTATIVE HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 13. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE DEEM IT F IT AND PROPER TO SEND BACK THE MATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WHO SHALL EXAMINE THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE THAT A SUM OF RS 8 LAKH S WAS REFUNDED BY THE SELLER OF LAND AT CHEHADI WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY NOT PUR CHASED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CONTAINED IN P AGES 215-216 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND ARE NOT BEING REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE O F BREVITY. HOWEVER OUR REMANDING THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED AS ANY REFLECTION ON THE MERITS OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL EXAMINE THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW AFTER PROVIDING THE ASSESSEE A DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN THE MATTER AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ADJU DICATE UPON AFRESH ON THIS ASPECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WE MAY A LSO NOTICE HERE THAT IN SO FAR AS THE EXPLANATION CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND WHICH HAS NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE THE ASSESSE E HAS NOT RAISED ANY FRESH ARGUMENTS AND THEREFORE THE FINDINGS OF THE C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ARE ENDORSED. IN OTHER WORDS IN CASE THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER IN THE ENSUING REMAND PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE THAT RS 8 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED BY HIM AS REFUND OF PURCHASE CONSIDERATION THEN THE SAID ADDITION WOULD BE LIABLE TO BE SUSTAINED. W ITH THIS DIRECTION THE MATTER IS 7 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH AS DIRECTED ABOVE. 14. GROUND NO. 4 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. GROUND NOS. 5 & 6 WERE NOT PRESSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL AT T HE TIME OF HEARING AND THEREFORE THEY ARE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 15. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 16. WE SHALL NOW TAKE UP ITA NO 249/PN/07 FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE SMT INDUMATI G GULVE FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1990 TO 1 1.1.2001. GROUND NO. 1 RELATES TO THE ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BEING SIMILAR TO THAT OF SHRI GOPAL R GULVE ( ITA NO 250/PN/07 FOLLOWING THE SIMILAR PARITY OF REASONING WE AFFIRM THE ESTIMAT ION MADE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE FAILS ON THIS GROUND. 17. GROUND NO. 3 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT C ALL FOR ANY ADJUDICATION. GROUND NOS 4 AND 5 WERE NOT PRESSED BY THE LEARNED COU NSEL AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND THEREFORE ARE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 18. IN THE RESULT ITA NO 249/PN/07 IN THE CASE OF SMT INDUMATI G GULVE IS DISMISSED. 19. WE SHALL NOW TAKE UP ITA NO.248/PN/07 FILED IN TH E CASE OF SHRI SANDEEP G GULVE. 20. GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND NEEDS NO A DJUDICATION. GROUND NO. 2 RELATES TO THE ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BEING SIMILAR TO THAT OF SHRI GOPAL R GULVE ( ITA NO 250/PN/07 FOLLOWING THE SIMILAR PARITY OF REASONING WE AFFIRM THE ESTIMAT ION MADE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE FAILS ON THIS GROUND. 21. GROUND NO. 3 READS AS FOLLOWS: 3. THE LD CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS WHILE MAKING FOLLOWING ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF NEGATIVE CASH BALANCE AS PE R ANNEXURE A AS PER PARA 21: AY 1996-97 RS 6 46 060/- AY 1997-98 RS 1 88 586/- 8 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS. 22. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF RIVAL PARTIES. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALREADY HELD ABOVE THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HOLD VAST AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS ESTIMATED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS TO BE ACCEPTED. ON THE SIMILAR PARITY OF REASONING WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) O N THIS ISSUE AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO GIVE TELESCOPING BY CONSIDERING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR S ET OFF. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL GIVE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ADJUDICATING UPON THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY US AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AS ABOVE. 23. GROUND NO. 4 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT CAL L FOR ANY ADJUDICATION. 24. GROUND NOS 5 & 6 WERE NOT PRESSED AT THE TIME OF H EARING AND THEREFORE THEY ARE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 25. IN THE RESULT ITA NO. 248/PN/07 IN THE CASE OF SH RI SANDEEP G GULVE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 29 TH DAY OF JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE: DATED: 29 TH JULY 2011 B COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANTS 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) II NASHIK 4. THE CIT NASHIK 5. THE D.R B BENCH PUNE 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT PUNE BENCHES PUNE 9 ITA NOS 248-250/PN/07 GOPALRAO R GULVE & ORS.