TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 82
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed by Revenue relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. However, in order to adjudicate the issues, reference is being made to the facts and issues in ITA No.2754/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2012-13. 3. The Revenue in ITA No.2754/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2012-13 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- (i) The Order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to law and to the facts and circumstances of the case. (ii) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in directing the AO to treat the assessee's income as agricultural income u/s 2(1A)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and to exclude the said income u/s 10(1) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the said hybrid seeds. The claim of assessee was that growing of hybrid seeds involve carrying out of agricultural operations jointly with the land owners and hence, it was engaged in carrying on the agricultural activities. The assessee was purchasing seeds and then producing hybrid seeds in the net houses and marketing the same. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the said activity carried on by assessee is not agricultural activity. Hence, receipts of Rs. 5,54,19,293/- were treated as income of assessee and exemption claimed under section 10(1) of the Act was denied to assessee. The Assessing Officer holds that profit earned of the same was to be brought to tax as income from non-agricultural business activity. 6. The CIT(A) v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was not warranted. 7. The next issue which was adjudicated by CIT(A) vide para 8 onwards was whether the activity carried on by assessee fell within category of agricultural activities or not and held that the same becomes academic. However, he also notes that the issue stands covered in favour of assessee by Pune Bench of Tribunal in ACIT Vs. Ajeet Seeds Ltd. in ITA Nos.109 to 115/PN/2012, relating to assessment years 2002-03 to 2008-09, order dated 22.03.2013. The relevant portion of order of Tribunal is reproduced at pages 21 to 23 of appellate order and the CIT(A) held that even on merits, there was no need to treat the same as business income. 8. The Revenue is in appeal against the order of CIT(A). 9. The learned Departmental Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of assessee at Rs. 5.54 crores which were the total receipts from the activity carried on by assessee. The order of Assessing Officer thus, suffers from infirmity in this regard as what is to be taxed in the hands of assessee is the income / loss arising from any venture and not the total receipts from any activity carried on by assessee. Admittedly, the assessee himself had reported the receipts at Rs. 5.54 crores and claimed the same to be exempt under section 10(1) of the Act; but had also enclosed audited Profit and Loss Account, in which it had declared loss of Rs. 1.22 crores. In this regard, the CIT(A) has correctly held that there is no merit in the order of Assessing Officer in assessing total receipts in the hands of assessee and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irmative. The relevant para 7 reads as under:- "7. Coming back to the question, as to whether growing breeder and foundation seeds would amount to "agriculture‟, the answer has to be affirmative. It is not denied that for growing breeder and foundation seeds, seeds are sown in filed and usual agricultural operations, basic and subsequent, are undertaken utilizing human skill. In addition to this, measures are taken for restricting role of nature. Such measures are only taken in enhancing the yield. Such measures, thus, have nothing to do with the biological growth that takes place in the soil or such other substratum where the seeds are sown. An agriculturist while growing his crops, is known to have used conventional as well as sc....