TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (8) TMI 619
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The contention of the assessee is that he had offered an amount of ₹ 7,349 as income from "other sources" as can be seen from page-1 of the paper compilation filed. In the accounting year relevant to assessment year 1990-91, he received a sum of ₹ 13,125 from Kalpataru Enterprises and a sum of ₹ 25,094 from Suvidha Builders both put together making a sum of ₹ 38,219 as interest. He is showing this interest amount as income from "other sources". The assessee filed rectificatory letters dated 5-3-1992 and 11-2-94. In the alternative, he says that with reference to a sum of ₹ 6,219, there was a double addition. He says that while returning a sum of ₹ 7,349, the impugned sum of ₹ 6,219 was already taken into consideration. As already stated, the gross total income, from out of which ₹ 7,349 was derived, was ₹ 57,168.70. The particulars of ₹ 57,168.70 were given at Schedule I now found at page-9 of the paper compilation. The particulars mentioned in Schedule I are as follows : "Income from other sources Rs. 1. NSC ACC Interest 1,130.00 2. Interest & other Income 38,219.00 39,349.00 Less : 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... held that the sum of ₹ 32,000 did not pertain to the income earned under the head "Other sources" and it was wrongly debited to his income. Whether the sum of ₹ 32,000 can be deducted or not is not a debatable issue and, therefore, he held that the assessee's claim is totally wrong against income under "other sources." He dismissed the appeal. 3. Against the dismissed appeal, the assessee filed the present second appeal. Firstly, it was stated to be an appeal against the intimation under section 143(1)(a). Then, the ld. Departmental Representative objected stating that it is made applicable only from 1-6-1994 but not before that date under section 246(1)(a). The learned counsel for the assessee then corrected himself and stated that the appeal is an appeal against 154 order and it is quite within time. Now, in the second appeal, the assessee filed an application for receiving additional grounds of appeal. The petition for receipt of additional grounds was filed on 26-3-1998. In the said petition, it is stated that ₹ 54,000 was added as agricultural income in his return. However, while computing the tax liability, the rebate in respect of agri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her the assessee is an old assessee or a new assessee. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that he is an old assessee and he is on the rolls of the Income-tax Department since a long time. Secondly, I asked him to furnish his statement of income filed for earlier years along with his income-tax return in order to compare the expenditure said to have been incurred for earning other sources of income in the earlier years prior to assessment year 1990-91. Though the assessee promised to file them, ultimately he failed to do so. Therefore, an adverse inference should be drawn. It is not the case of the assessee that he has been maintaining books of account in which the expenditure incurred towards conveyance, professional fees, telephone expenses and sundry expenses were all recorded and vouchers for the same were available. Under the circumstances, I hold that only a reasonable sum which is essential to earn income from "other sources" is estimated at ₹ 3,000 and instead of ₹ 32,000 I allow only ₹ 3,000 to be deducted while computing the other sources of income. 5. The next question which falls for determination is about the agricultural rebate.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ultural income. There is no minimum limit in respect of net agricultural income for the purpose. Then the question is how to compute the income-tax in cases covered by the scheme. The opening portion of para-12 of the circular is as follows : "12. Calculation of income-tax in cases covered by the Scheme.- In cases covered by the Scheme, income-tax will be calculated in the following manner, subject to a modification in relation to surcharge on income-tax as explained in para-13 : (i)the agricultural and non-agricultural component of the taxpayer's income will first be aggregated and income-tax (including surcharge) calculated on the aggregate as if such aggregate were the total income; (ii)income-tax (including surtax) will then be calculated on the net agricultural income as increased by an amount of ₹ 5,000 as if such increased agricultural income were the total income; (iii)the amount by which the income-tax (including surcharge) calculated under (i) exceeds the amount calculated under, (ii) will be the income-tax (including surcharge) payable by the taxpayer on his total income." In cases covered by the scheme, income-tax will be calculated in the follo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onal Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383/ 97 Taxman 358 , in which case the earlier Supreme Court decision rendered in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688, on which the Departmental Representative heavily relied upon, was explained and distinguished. The learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the categorical decision of the Supreme Court found at pages 386-387, which is as follows : "In the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688, this Court, while dealing with the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner observed that an appellate authority has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statutory provisions, the appellate authority is vested with all the plenary powers which the subordinate authority may have in the matter. There is no good reason t o justify curtailment of the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in entertaining an additional ground raised by the assessee in seeking modification of the order of assessment passed by the Inco....