2021 (3) TMI 316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- apart from agricultural income of Rs. 1,50,000/- at normal provisions for the A.Y 2012-13. The return was initially processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and subsequently selected for scrutiny under CASS. 3. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, the relevant information was called for by the AO, but only part information was furnished by the assessee. Therefore, the AO proceeded to complete the assessment in the absence of full information/details on the basis of the return of income filed and also part information filed in Tappal. The AO observed that the assessee had sold certain land but did not offer capital gain on the same on the ground that it is agricultural land. The AO however, held that the land cannot be treate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT(A) erred in deleting the addition of unexplained investment of Rs. 1,22,00,000/ - by admitting additional evidence without affording an opportunity to the AO thereby, contravening Rule 46A of I.T. Rule. 3. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,000/ - made under income from other sources by holding that same represented agricultural income merely relying on the fact that agricultural income was admitted in earlier year without appreciating the fact that assessee did not produce any cogent evidence in respect of earning of agriculture income either during assessment or in appellate proceedings. 4. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of unexplained deposits of Rs. 3,61,56,424/- by admitting additional....