IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.856/Ind/2016 Assessment Year:2011-12 Shri Bhupendra Singh ACIT Circle Khandwa Khandpure Vs. P/o M/s. Central Motors, Pandhana Road Khandwa PAN:ATQPS2324C Appellant Respondent Appellant by Shri Prakash Jain, CA Respondent by Shri Mohmd. Javed, Sr. (DR) /Date of hearing 03.10.2016 Date of 19.10.2016 pronouncement O R D E R PER O. P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMEBR. 1. This appeal is filed by assessee is directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-II, Indore (hereinafter referred to as ld. CIT (A))dated 17.06.2016. This I.T.A.No. 359/Ind/2015/A.Y.10-11/Sh Bhupendra Singh Kandpure Page 2 of 4 appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2011-12. This appeal arises out of assessment order dtd. 13.02.2014 passed u/s. 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after referred to as "the Act ) by DCIT Khandwa [hereinafter referred to as AO ]. 2. Ground No.1 is general in nature and does not require adjudication and also not pressed, hence, treated as dismissed. 3. Ground No. 2 states that ld. CIT (A) had erred in confirming reduction of agricultural income from Rs.13,70,500/- to Rs. 7,44,020/-and agricultural income treated as income from other sources at Rs. 6,26,480/- which is wrong , illegal and unwarranted. 4. Succinctly, facts of case are that assessee is individual, derives as share income from partnership firm and agricultural income. assessee has shown agricultural income at Rs.13, 70,500/- out of which Rs. 6, 26,480/- has been treated as income from other sources. assessment order has been passed after following finding of preceding assessment year 2010-11 where on similar manner addition of Rs. 7,72,530/- was made out of agricultural income of Rs. 16,90,000/-. 5. Being aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT (A). However, ld. CIT (A) has confirmed finding of A.O. 6. Being aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before this tribunal. Before us, learned counsel for assessee submitted that assessee is holding 44 acres of irrigated agricultural land and holding of family is 133 acres agricultural land. assessee has filed details of crop sales and details of party wise sales. According to which assessee has shown on spot sales of vegetables, wheat etc. at Rs.3, 94,800/-. Which has been used for seeds and I.T.A.No. 359/Ind/2015/A.Y.10-11/Sh Bhupendra Singh Kandpure Page 3 of 4 reproduction produce. Moreover 8 agriculturist have filed confirmation with RIN Pustika to whom sale of Rs. 3, 94,800/- were affected. However, AO following finding of preceding year treated income of Rs. 6, 26,480/- as income from other sources. During course of hearing ld. A. R. has filed working after reducing 30% from sales outside Mandi which worked out to Rs. 1, 18,440/- as against Rs. 3, 94,800/-shown by Assessee . Accordingly it was submitted that agricultural income be accepted at Rs. 12,52,060/- as against agricultural income of Rs. Shown at Rs. 13,70,500/- by assessee . ld. A. R. has also placed reliance in case of Neelam Patni 17 TTJ 135 (MP- Ind) and Anil Kumar Pachori 18 TTJ108 (MP-Jbl) where agricultural income shown by Assessee was on basis of confirmation filed by Assessee. 7. Ld. Senior (DR) vehemently supported order of lower authorities, and submitted that no books of accounts for agricultural produce is maintained and income is being shown on estimate basis. 8. We have heard rival submissions and have gone through orders of lower authorities and perused material available on record. We find that assessee has shown agricultural income sales at Rs. 13,70,500/- which includes Rs.3,94,800/- sale to private parties. These sales are in nature of on spot sales made effected outside Mandi to private parties. We find that assessee has agricultural land holding at 44 acres of irrigated agricultural land. assessee has also filed confirmation of I.T.A.No. 359/Ind/2015/A.Y.10-11/Sh Bhupendra Singh Kandpure Page 4 of 4 parties i.e. agriculturist, to whom sales was made. Therefore, considering circumstances and in absence of books of accounts in respect of agricultural produce being not maintained and case laws as relied on by Assessee, it would be reasonable to estimate 30% of sales amounting to Rs.3,94,800/- to private parties as non-explained agricultural income which would be worked out to Rs.1,80,000/-. Accordingly, addition of Rs. 1,18,440/- is confirmed and balance addition of Rs.5,08,040/- i.e. [ Rs. 6,26,480- Rs.1,18,440] is deleted. This ground of appeal is therefore, partly allowed. 9. In result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed. 10. order pronounced in open court on 19.10-2016 Sd/- Sd- (D.T.GARASIA) (O.P.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 19th October, 2016.OPM Bhupendra Singh Khandpure v. ACIT, Circle Khandwa