TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 515
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issue raised in these appeals relates to the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained deposits in the bank account after treating it to be the income from other sources, having rejected the contention of the assessees that the deposits are agricultural income. 3. The facts in brief borne out from the record are that the assessees are individuals and they have filed their returns of income declaring agricultural income therein. Mohd. Zubair Siddiqui has shown total income of Rs. 10,70,430/- and agricultural income of Rs. 24,70,800/- whereas Sheikh Mohd. Tariq, the other assessee, has declared his total income at Rs. 14,03,730/- and agricultural income at Rs. 24,70,800/-. During the course of assessment proceedings....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer deserves to be deleted. 5. The ld. CIT(A) re-examined the case of the assessees but was not convinced with their explanations. He rather distinguished the facts of the case from the order of the Tribunal in the assessees own cases and has confirmed the additions. 6. Now the assessees are in appeal before the Tribunal with the submission that the Revenue has not disputed the certified copies of khasra & khatauni of agricultural holdings/orchard holdings in the name of the assessees. The Tribunal has examined all these aspects in the assessee's own case in assessment year 2010-11 and has come to a conclusion that wherever assessee owns orchard farms, there should be some agricultural income from these Mango Orchard. In t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding that the assessee owns Mango Orchard and once it is held that the assessee owns Mango Orchard, agricultural income is bound to be earned. In that assessment year, the ld. CIT(A) has called report from the Tehsildar, Malhabad, Lucknow and Udyan Adhikari, Lucknow with regard to the production of Mango from Orchard farm and taking into account the size of the Orchard farm, the ld. CIT(A) has estimated the agricultural income from Mango Orchard which was accepted by the Tribunal. A copy of the order of the Tribunal is placed on record and for the sake of reference, we extract the relevant observations of the Tribunal as under:- "7. Having carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities in the light of the rival submissions,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he inheritors of their mother. It is also noticed that the assessee has filed written submission before the ld. CIT(A) on which remand report was called by the ld. CIT(A) and thereafter on the remand report comments were also sought from the assessee. The ld. CIT(A), while adjudicating the issue, has taken into account the report of the Tehsildar, Malihabad, Lucknow and report of the Udhyan Adhikari, Lucknow with respect to the production of Mangoes from these Orchards and also report of the Income Tax Inspector. Keeping in view the reports, the ld. CIT(A) has held that no addition is called for, as the amount deposited in the joint bank account is agricultural income earned by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has also observed in his order tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l income, no addition was called for. But in the instant case, the total deposits in the bank accounts were of Rs. 69,26,600/- and during the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has tried to establish that the entire deposits were made out of agricultural income, but he has claimed the agricultural income at Rs. 24,70,800/- each in the hands of both the assessees. If that be the case, the total agricultural income, according to the assessee, comes to Rs. 49,40,600/- but the total amount deposited in bank is Rs. 69,26,600/-. Even if we accept the contention of the assessee that he has agricultural income of Rs. 24,70,800/- each in comparison to Rs. 20,00,750/- shown in assessment year 2010-11, the assessee is required to expl....