1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee, deleting unjustified income additions for assessment year 2003-2004.</h1> The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal against the CIT(Appeals) order for the assessment year 2003-2004. The Tribunal deleted the additions of ... - Issues involved: Appeal against CIT(Appeals) order for Asst. Year 2003-2004.Grounds 1 and 4: Dismissed as not pressed by the assessee. Ground 5 is general.Ground 2: Challenge to disallowance of gross agricultural receipt of Rs. 1,58,217.Ground 3: Challenge to addition on account of undisclosed agricultural income of Rs. 3,10,941.The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(Appeals) order for the assessment year 2003-2004. The Assessing Officer noted the nature of the assessee's business to include rental income, interest, and agricultural income. The assessee claimed income from agriculture totaling Rs. 5,38,850. The Assessing Officer found discrepancies in the claimed expenses related to agricultural income, specifically regarding the sale of vegetables and sugarcane crops. The Assessing Officer made additions to the income due to lack of evidence for the claimed expenses. The CIT(A) upheld the additions, leading to the appeal.The Tribunal considered the facts of the case along with a previous decision regarding a similar issue. It was noted that the assessee had rental and interest income from known sources, apart from agricultural income. As the income from these sources was specific and ascertained, the Tribunal found no justification for the additions made by the authorities. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions to support the deletion of the additions, as the Assessing Officer failed to provide evidence of income from other sources. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the additions of Rs. 1,58,217 and Rs. 3,10,941, as the assessee had no other income apart from agricultural income.In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed by the Tribunal, as the additions made by the authorities regarding the agricultural income were found to be unjustified due to the lack of evidence for income from sources other than agriculture.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
