Commissioner Of Income Tax Madurai Appellant v. Mrs.kulandai Theresa Respondent

Dated : 15.04.2009 Coram : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH Tax Case (Appeal)No.35 of 2009 Commissioner of Income TaxMadurai Appellant v. Mrs.Kulandai Theresa Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 30.06.2008 passed in IT(SS)ANo.71/Mds/2004. For appellant : Mrs.Pushya Sitaraman JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered byK.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J.) The revenue on appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench,Chennai, dated 30.06.2008 passed in IT(SS)A No.71/Mds/2004. 2. The facts as culled out from the statement of facts in the memorandum of grounds of appeal areas follows:- A search took place in the residential and business premises of Late Shri.C.Sudalaimani Nadar, Eralon 07.07.1999 under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which revealed various investments,expenditure, movable and immovable assets. The assessing Officer initiated proceedings undersection 158 BC and after examining the books of accounts and other information gathered duringsearch, determined the undisclosed income at Rs.30,50,630/-. On appeal, the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) estimated the agricultural income and non-agricultural income and deletedthe addition to that extent for the reason that the assessee had not disclosed his agricultural incomeas well as non-agricultural income to the full extent in the regular return of income filed and on thatbasis the undisclosed income was determined at Rs.9,15,490/-. Both the revenue as well as theassessee filed appeal and cross-appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the ground that the assessee had suppressed not only hisnon-agricultural income, but also his agricultural income. Therefore, when the undisclosed part ofthe non-agricultural income is worked out, it is incumbent upon the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) to give credit for the undisclosed part of the agricultural income and dismissed the appealfiled by the revenue. The same is now put in issue by formulating the following question of law:- "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the CIT(A)order when the CIT(A) has failed to estimate the agricultural income of the assessee considering theextent of lands and the agricultural income admitted by the assessee in his regular return ofincome?". 3. We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the revenue and perused the materialsavailable on record. 4. There is no doubt that the agricultural income is an exempted income for the purpose of IncomeTax. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has reasonably established on examination of thematerials available before him that the assessee had suppressed not only his non-agricultural incomebut also his agricultural income. Therefore, when the undisclosed part of the non-agriculturalincome is worked out, it is lawfully incumbent upon the officer concerned to give credit for theundisclosed part of the agricultural income. That is what exactly done in this case. We find no meritin thisK.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J. And M.M.SUNDRESH, J. rgappeal so as to entertain the same. Hence the appeal is dismissed. (K.R.P.,J.) (M.M.S.,J.)15.04.2009Index : Yes/Internet : Yes/rg ToTo 1. Commissioner of Income TaxMadurai 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai 'D' Bench, Chennai. 15.04.2009