Sachin Bhagwanrao Joshi Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Assessee, running a public service centre, filed return u/s 44AD showing income of ₹2.99 lakh but inadvertently included ₹38.26 lakh as agricultural income. On scrutiny, AO held that Assessee neither owned agricultural land nor had any such income, & added the entire amount as “income from other sources.” CIT(A)/NFAC upheld the addition.
Before ITAT, Assessee submitted that the entry of agricultural income was a clerical mistake by the tax consultant’s staff & filed affidavits-one from himself & another from the erring clerk-admitting the error. Tribunal noted that these affidavits were new evidence not earlier considered & that no proof existed of such income in bank statements or assets.
Holding that “no person should be taxed on an income which never existed,” ITAT accepted the affidavits as additional evidence & remanded the matter to AO for de novo assessment after verifying facts & granting opportunity to the assessee.
Held: Matter restored to AO for fresh decision; addition not sustained at this stage. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.10.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2020-21.
