TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT(A)"], for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing the impugned order in the manner passed. The impugned order passed confirming the assessment order is bad in law and such order is liable to be quashed. 2. Without prejudice, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing officer by treating the agricultural income as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. On the facts and circumstances of the case and the law applicable, there being no unexplained money, the provisions of section 69A of the Act are not applicable. The addition made to the income of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its return of income on 02.01.2021 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,11,650/- and agricultural income of Rs. 48,68,369/-. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee submitted copies of the sale bills for agricultural produce, etc., and stated that the agricultural income was earned from the sale of Betal Nut, Paddy, Onion, Vegetable, Coconuts and Bananas. Accordingly, the assessee claimed total sales of Rs. 57,86,569/- and, after claiming total agricultural expenses of Rs. 9,18,200/-, claimed net agricultural income of Rs. 48,68,369/- during the year under consideration. During the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... acquired by him on 03.10.2019. However, from the details provided in RTC, it was noticed that no crops/onion has been grown on the said land during the year under consideration. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer ("AO"), vide order dated 19.09.2023 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, disagreed with the claim of the assessee that the agricultural income of Rs. 30,18,910/- was from the sale of onions. Further, after taking into consideration the process of onion cultivation, the AO noted that about 10-12 kg of seeds are required to raise seedlings for 1 hectare of transplanting. It was also noted that the onion production requires a heavy dose of fertilisers for a good yield. Taking into consideration the fact that the land w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lanation and treating the sum as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. In light of the above discussion, the addition of Rs. 30,18,910/- under Section 69A of the Act is sustained. Therefore, these grounds of appeal are dismissed. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. During the hearing, the learned Authorised Representative ("learned AR") submitted that during the year under consideration, the assessee acquired 13.25 acres of land at Dhyamavanahalli. The learned AR submitted that, accordingly, the assessee's agricultural income increased in the year under consideration. It was submitted that on the said land the assessee cultivated 1125.83 quintals of onion, which was sold for Rs. 30,18,910/-. It was furth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....conuts and Bananas. From the perusal of the assessment order, it is evident that even though the AO raised various queries regarding the genuineness of the claim of earning agricultural income during the year under consideration, viz-a-viz, the agricultural expenses incurred by the assessee. However, made the addition only on account of the agricultural income claimed to have been earned from the sale of onions. As per the assessee on 03.10.2019, he purchased 13.25 acres of agricultural land at Dhyamavanahalli, on which he cultivated onion, and from the sale of the same, he earned agricultural income of Rs. 30,18,910/-. We find that the AO, as well as the learned CIT(A), have recorded a categorical finding that the assessee did not furnish ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng channel. 9. It is clearly evident from the record that, for lack of complete evidence, the lower authorities disagreed with the submissions of the assessee. Further, the evidence specifically relied upon by the learned AR and claimed to have been furnished before the lower authorities has not been examined. Therefore, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim of earning agricultural income to the tune of Rs. 30,18,910/- from the sale of onions. Since the issue under consideration requires detailed verification of evidence/documents, we restore the matter to the file of the Jurisdictional AO for de novo adjudication, after taking into consideration the ev....