AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 567
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. DR did not object to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the respective delay in filing both the appeals and appeals are heard finally. 3. First, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.461/CTK/2024 for A.Y.2016-2017, wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. That the impugned Appellate Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Income Tax Department, Govt. of India is bad in law and without application of mind. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer assessing the taxable income of the assessee based on erroneous facts and without applying his mind while considering the agricultural income as unexplained credit u/s 68 and accordingly made the addition of Rs. 1,88,34,720 and raised the demand against the assessee. The assessee vehemently opposes such action of the Assessing Officer and also aggrieved by the CIT(A) for not allowing the appeal adjudicated in favour of the assessee based on the facts of the case and consistent in recognizing the income by the assessee for last several years. The assessee prays before the Hon'ble Income T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld. AR submitted that the assessee has claimed expenses which includes the expenses on purchase of seeds for both the activities and while alleging the agricultural income as unexplained, the AO observed that the assessee has failed to produce the bills of seeds purchased. However, while alleging so, the AO has adopted double standards where on one hand he allowed the deduction towards purchase of seeds for fishery products and on other hand has doubted the purchase of seeds for agricultural products. He further submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings the Ward Inspector visited the land of the assessee to verify as to whether the agricultural activities were actually carried out or not. He further submitted that no order authorizing the inspector to make such verification is made as is evident from the perusal of order sheet which is placed in paper book. Ld. AR stated that as per the Inspector's report, he observed that there were no trees etc. were available as claimed by the assessee for having agricultural income at the time of his visit which was carried out in October, 2018. As per the ld. AR the Inspector visited the land in October, 2018 when the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sits to the borrowers premises to confirm that the funds were utilized for which they were granted and further periodic stock statements were also obtained by the bankers to ensure that the credits facility was properly utilized and duly supported by the securities. In view of these facts, the ld. AR prayed that assessee was actually carried out agriculture activity on the land besides having fishery production, thus, the addition made by the AO holding agricultural income as unexplained cash credit deserves to be deleted. 6. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee has failed to controvert the finding of the AO with regard to the agricultural activity carried out at the land which are based on spot enquiry by Inspector. Further the assessee has not produced entire bills & vouchers of expenses claimed against agriculture income. Therefore, he requested for the confirmation of the addition so made and confirmed by the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, one thing is not disputed by either of the party that the la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rved that paddy was available in patches at the land of assessee. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee has been able to establish that agricultural activity was carried out by it and further able to substantiate the agricultural income earned from the sale of agricultural produce which were cultivated on the land owned by it with all plausible evidences and, therefore, the addition made on this account is hereby deleted and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed. 10. Now, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee for A.Y.2018-2019 filed in ITA No.460/CTK/2024, wherein the facts are pari materia to the facts discussed in the appeal for A.Y.2016-2017. As the arguments put forth by both the parties are identical to the grounds raised for both the years under consideration, except different in figures, therefore, the reasoning given by us in the appeal i.e. ITA No.461/CTK/2024 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeal of the assessee for A.Y.2016-2017 also. Accordingly, we hold that the agricultural income declared by the assessee is genuine and addition made in this regard is hereby deleted. Thus, grounds of appeal of the assessee for this y....