2014 (1) TMI 1292 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal grants appeal, emphasizes thorough reevaluation.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting both issues back to the Assessing Officer for a thorough reevaluation based on all ... Addition of Rs.1,40,00,000 made by AO – Explanations and evidences ignored – Addition made for agricultural income – Held that:- The whole case should be relooked again by Assessing Officer and it is directed that Assessing Officer should make proper and detailed enquiries before arriving at any conclusion regarding additions if any. Therefore, the case is remitted back to office of Assessing Officer - The CIT (A) has not given any directions rather he had decided on the issues unlike in the earlier year however, substantial facts remains same – the present appeal needs be also re-adjudicated by Assessing Officer - The Assessing Officer on the basis of relevant record and information from the Income Tax record of the Shri Rajender Singh Khetasar as well as from any other source can arrive at the appropriate decision - None of the observations will preclude the Assessing Officer from making additions if on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer establishes that the amount received represented income of the assessee – Decided in favour of Assessee. Issues:1. Addition of Rs.1,40,00,000/- as commission income2. Addition of Rs.6,37,777/- as income from other sources instead of agricultural incomeIssue 1: Addition of Rs.1,40,00,000/- as commission incomeThe appellant appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2008-09, challenging the addition of Rs.1,40,00,000/- as commission income. The appellant argued that the commission income had not accrued or arisen during the year, thus questioning the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to tax it as income. Additionally, the appellant highlighted that PACL India Ltd. had filed criminal proceedings against the individual who was assigned the job, denying any commission payment. The Assessing Officer justified the addition based on an agreement between the appellant and another individual, observing that the appellant utilized the amount for property purchases and loans. The appellant contended that the amount was received as a friendly loan and that the land acquisition was incomplete due to disputes. The Tribunal remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer for a detailed reevaluation, emphasizing the need for proper inquiries and consideration of all relevant facts.Issue 2: Addition of Rs.6,37,777/- as income from other sourcesThe second issue involved the addition of Rs.6,37,777/- as income from other sources instead of agricultural income declared by the appellant. The appellant claimed agricultural income from the sale of sugarcane, rice, and seasonal vegetables, supported by documentary evidence. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim, citing discrepancies in the location of agricultural land and the lack of evidence for agricultural expenses. The appellant's assertion of a profit-sharing agreement for agricultural produce was also dismissed. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to reexamine this issue based on actual agricultural records, ensuring the appellant's right to be heard during the process.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting both issues back to the Assessing Officer for a thorough reevaluation based on all relevant facts and records. The decision emphasized the importance of proper inquiries and consideration of the totality of circumstances before making any additions to the appellant's income.