https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755829 ITAT Bengaluru allowed the assessee HUF's appeal against addition of agricultural expenditure. The HUF cultivated coffee, pepper, areca nut, coconut, banana and coco on 8 acres 27 guntas in Karnataka. Both AO and CIT(A) estimated 30% of gross agricultural income as expenditure without verification or adverse material. ITAT held that increasing agricultural expenditure to reduce exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) cannot automatically create taxable income from other sources under section 4(1) without material evidence. The addition based on assumptions and surmises was deleted. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jul 2024 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755829 ITAT Bengaluru allowed the assessee HUF's appeal against addition of agricultural expenditure. The HUF cultivated coffee, pepper, areca nut, coconut, banana and coco on 8 acres 27 guntas in Karnataka. Both AO and CIT(A) estimated 30% of gross agricultural income as expenditure without verification or adverse material. ITAT held that increasing agricultural expenditure to reduce exempt agricultural income under section 10(1) cannot automatically create taxable income from other sources under section 4(1) without material evidence. The addition based on assumptions and surmises was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755829