TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 1031
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ier assessment year, Assessing Officer treated the part of agricultural income shown by the assessee as 'income from other sources' and made an addition of Rs. 32,68,500/- on this account and total income was assessed at Rs. 36,52,650/-. 2.1. Aggrieved by such addition to the total income of assessee, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). 3. Before the CIT(A), assessee raised various Grounds and argued to delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Despite that, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer, by stating as under: "The reasoning and computation of the assessing officer is seems to be correct and hence, addition of Rs. 32,68,500/- treating the agricultural income as income from othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee and submitted the following statement: "The details of comparative figure of agriculture income shown and assessed are submitted as follows:- S.No. Particulars A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y, 2013-14 A.Y. 2012-13 (i) Area of Land used for agriculture activity 25.946 hectares 6.64 hectares + about 7 hectares from August 2011 6.64 hectares (ii) Agriculture income shown 32,68,500/- 32,56,582/- 28,23,870/- (iii) Accepted by A.O NIL 11,59,770/- 7,59,770/- (iv) Addition by A.O 32,68,500/- 20,96,812/- 20,64,100/- (v) CIT(A) Confirmed Deleted Deleted Note:- 1. Even as per report from the Horticulture Department (Page 18 of Assessment Order), the agriculture income shall be:- Net income = ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4,100/- per hectare. Pg.18 of the AO's order was as under: 6.2. It was submitted that the activity of the assessee was not doubted by the authorities in the previous two years and there is no change in facts for the present assessment year. The nature and holding of the land continues to be the same, further, the assessee had given the affidavit of 40 farmers, to whom the seed of potatos was given by the assessee. The details of which are mentioned by the AO at pg.7 of the order. It was further submitted that on account of the letter reproduced herein above from the Office of Horticulture Department, the per acre yield of potato would be an income of Rs. 84,100/- per hectare. However, this income is the minimum and conservative estimate, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2-13 was based on the fact that AO has not doubted the agricultural income. He only doubted the quantum of same in light of lesser land holding. The same decision was followed in subsequent assessment year. But since in this assessment year due to specific reasons of doubtful large agricultural income the case was taken in scrutinyand AO has made detailed independent verifications, therefore new facts have come to the surface based on which AO has treated part of income as agricultural and balance as income from other sources. 6.9 The onus to prove agricultural activities carried out is on the assessee but in spite of various opportunities provided by the AO, assessee could not file any proof of carrying out agricultural activities and f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT(A). The CIT(A) in the order in para 6.4 mentioned the land holding in the names of Mr.Brij Mohan and Mr.Lala Ram and thereafter had also recorded that the addition made by the AO for the assessment year to the tune of Rs. 20,96,812/- was deleted by the Ld.CIT(A). There is no change in the facts sofaras the land holdings is concerned. In the previous two years, as mentioned herein above, the assessee had claimed the agricultural income to the tune of Rs. 21 Lakhs approximately which in the present year had increased to Rs. 36 Lakhs approximately. In our view, the ends of justice required that the Principle of Consistency is required to be followed in respect of per hectare yield in the previous years, which is duly supported by the cert....