Case Law Details
Ashok Kumar Tyagi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT held that the addition of agricultural income as income from other sources was not based on any incriminating/seized material found as a result of search. Even, the disallowance of loss claimed against house property income is also not with reference to any seized material. It is a fact on record that on the date of search, the assessment proceedings relating to the impugned assessment years did not abet. Therefore, as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 0573 (Del), in a proceeding under section 153A of the Act, addition has to be made on the basis of seized/incriminating materials found as a result of search. Since, the decision of the Assessing Officer to treat the agricultural income as income from other sources and disallowance of loss claimed against house property income are not based on incriminating/seized material, no such addition/disallowance could have been made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we delete the addition/disallowance made on account of agricultural income and set off of loss against house property income. In view of our decision above, various other grounds raised by the assessee having become academic, are not adjudicated.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
These appeals are filed by the same assessee and arise out of a common order dated 17.05.2017 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31, New Delhi, pertaining to assessment years 2007-08 to 2013-14. However, presently we are concerned with assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
