Jamuna Shankar Sharma Vs ITO (ITAT Agra)
In the matter abovementioned ITAT restored the matter to CIT (A) after observing that he did not consider all the documents filed before it which were in nature of additional evidence.
Assessee and his family have 261 bighas of agricultural land and did not filed his ITR for AY 2017-18. AO received information that there was cash deposits of Rs. 10,00,000/- in the bank accounts of the assessee during demonetization. Notice issued to assessee remained uncomplied. AO completed assessment u/s 144 and made additions to the income of the assessee to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee being unexplained cash deposit.
Before CIT (A) it was submitted that only source of income of assessee is from agriculture, and the cash deposited during the demonetization period is related to his agricultural income. Assessee’s only son, used to look after the day-to-day activities of the assessee and used to keep records of the farm proceeds who passed away on 19.12.2020 after a prolonged illness. Assessee explained that the assessee was only engaged in agricultural activities and no other business activities. Assessee submitted that he withdrew money from time to time from the bank accounts for the agricultural purposes and has deposited the same back during the demonetization period. However, CIT (A) dismissed appeal and held that assessee failed to file complete land records like 7/12 extract etc., sale bills were incomplete and even land details were incomplete.
