TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 60
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT(A) has clearly erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the various direct and indirect evidence brought on record to prove that the assessee owned vast lands which could and did prove that Saffeda trees were cultivated and agricultural income of Rs. 8 lakhs declared on estimate basis represented sale of such saffeda trees." 2. Brief facts are: The assessee filed his return of income at Rs. 7,44,015/- on 13-6-2001. Being belated return, a notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act was issued by assessing officer on 29-3-2004. Vide letter dated 13-4-2004 the assessee submitted that its earlier return may be treated as one filed in response to notice u/s 148. In the return of income, the assessee had claimed agricultural income of Rs. 8 lak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atwari of the village, the extract of the report as quoted by my predecessor in that order is reproduced below: "The Patwari was asked to see his record and confirm whether there was any mention of saffeda trees in girdawari. He stated that Revenue record is silent about the crop in the land in the year 19999-2000 and earlier years. He further deposed that he personally do not know about the crop on assessee's land because he was not posted in that village in 1999-2000. So there is no material on revenue record for verification of assessee's claim of having cultivated saffeda trees. In the absence of any authentic Govt. records, the conclusion may kindly be drawn at your end on circumstantial or supplementary evidence available on record."....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Rs. 9 lac in two preceding years from the land owned by the assessee, it is clear that the assessee has not been able to establish and prove that the assessee has actually sold saffeda trees worth Rs. 5 lac in the year under consideration even if the assessee's claim of holding the land of 13 acres of land is accepted. For the reasons given above by us we uphold the orders of CIT(A) in confirming AO's action in assessing a sum of Rs. 5 lac as income from undisclosed sources as against agricultural income claimed by the assessee in as much as the assessee has not been able to explain the source and nature of the aforesaid sum of Rs. 5 lac shown as alleged agricultural income in the return of income. The order of the CIT(A) is, thus, uphel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The assessee's agriculture income may not have been accepted in subsequent years on the observation that when assessee had already cut and sold saffeda trees in earlier years there can be no agriculture income in subsequent years, but at the same time this observation itself impliedly accepts that 4-5 years back assessee had sold saffeda trees grown on 7 acres of pahari land. Ld. Counsel thus contends that: (i) there is no adverse statement given by the Patwari or reported by the Inspector for A.Y. 1998-99. (ii) The above residents of the village have corroborated that 4-5 years back the assessee had cut and sold saffeda trees grown on 7 acres of pahari land. (iii) A finding of A.Y. 2000-01 about non-agricultural income cannot be relied....