TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 41
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... these are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. At the first instance, we will deal with the appeal in ITA No. 5347/Del/2015 in the case of Hydric Farms Inputs Ltd., New Delhi Vs Pr. CIT(C), Kanpur. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: "1. BECAUSE the "Pr. CIT" has erred in law and on facts in observing that the regular assessment order dated 15.10.2014 had been passed by the Assessing Officer without examining/making enquiries on various issues [as specified in the notice under section 263(1) dated 23.0.2015] and on that ground in holding the said assessment order to be erroneous and also prejudicial to the interest of revenue so as to assume jurisdiction to set aside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m of agriculture related income (derived mainly from sale of saplings) could not be said or held to be unusual. and accordingly the revision of the assessment order dated 15.10.2014 is based on wrongful assumption of jurisdiction which is not tenable either on facts or in law. 4. BECAUSE in any case in the grounds referred to and relied upon by the "Pr. CIT", for revision of regular assessment order dated 15.10.2014 are wholly vague, indefinite, remote and farfetched and wholly irrelevant, so much so that even the case laws referred to in the impugned order are not relevant on the facts of the instant case, with the result that the order dated 16.06.2015 is wholly vitiated. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....os. 5 to 7, the main grievance of the assessee relates to the effective opportunity of being heard not given by the Pr. CIT. 5. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2012 declaring an income of Rs. 62,12,825/-. The AO, however, completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at an income of Rs. 64,09,844/- vide order dated 15.10.2014 by making the addition of Rs. 1,97,019/- on account of telephone expenses. Thereafter, the Pr. CIT exercised his powers u/s 263 of the Act and observed that the assessment order dated 15.10.2014 had been passed by the AO without examination and that the order was found to be erroneous and also prejudicial to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e? (b) What are the expenses attributable in earning this agricultural income which is exempt in view of section 14A? If a separate P&L account is prepared, the result would be as under:- Receipt(in Rs.) Net profit (in Rs.) Net profit rate Agriculture related (claimed exernpt) 3,36,75,250/- 2,85,09,239/- 84.66% Non agriculture related 37,05,25, 289/- 64,55,921/- 1.74% Total 40,42,00,539/- 3,49,65,160/- 8.65% This analysis clearly indicates that there is abnormal profit declared in respect of exempt income and very low profit declared in respect of taxable income. As per section 14A(2) of the IT Act, 1961 " The Assessing Officer shall determine the amount of expenditure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... As per details of agricultural income submitted by the assessee during the assessment proceedings and which is forming part of assessment record, the assessee has stated that besides sale of agricultural input through 69 retail shops called Khushali Kendra across UP, he is also engaged in cultivation and selling of sapling/seedling of various varieties grown in the land owned by the company as well as land taken on lease with owners at various locations. Now as per balance sheet, land owned by the assessee company is only worth Rs. 10,73,440/-. Earning income of Rs. 2.85 crore from land valued at Rs. 10.73 lakhs is not justified from any stretch of imagination. In P&L account cultivation expenses of Rs. 51,66,011/- has been debited a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial to the interest of revenue and set aside the same. 7. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the request for adjournment was made to the ld. CIT(A), since the mother of the authorized representative got burnt and was going through medical treatment. In support of the above contention, he furnished the copy of letter dated 06.04.2015 addressed to the Pr. CIT(C), Kanpur. It was further submitted that the assessee was facing the hardship, for that reason time was sought but the ld. Pr. CIT held that the assessment order passed by the AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue without giving a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, even when a sufficient time was availab....