Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after rejecting an assessee's return and making an assessment under the best-judgment procedure, the assessing authority can allow a deduction for cultivation expenses greater than the amount claimed in the return and is bound by the return figure.
Analysis: Under the statutory scheme, the total agricultural income is determined by estimating the gross income and the permissible deductions. Where the return is rejected and the assessing authority proceeds under the best-judgment power, the same method applies both to gross receipts and to deductions. The deduction figure stated in the return is only an admission and is not conclusive; it may be disbelieved or treated as incorrect. The return does not bind the authority once it has been rejected, and there is no statutory restriction preventing allowance of a higher deduction if that is what the authority, on the available materials and best judgment, considers proper. The doctrine of estoppel does not prevent the assessee from obtaining a larger deduction in such assessment proceedings.
Conclusion: The assessing authority may, under the best-judgment assessment provision, allow a larger deduction than that claimed in the rejected return and is not bound by the deduction figure stated by the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: In a best-judgment assessment after rejection of a return, permissible deductions are also to be estimated on the same footing as gross income, and the amount shown in the return is only evidentiary, not binding.