B JAYALAKSHMI Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Review Applications have been filed by the assessee to review the common judgment in TCA.Nos.819 to 821 of 2010, dated 30.09.2013. The assessee preferred these appeals against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97 & 1997-1998. The Appeals were admitted on the following substantial question of law:-

(2.) By the common judgment, dated 30.09.2013, the appeals were dismissed, confirming the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(3.) Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.S.Wilson, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this Court had not focused on jurisdictional grounds namely, (1) that the Tribunal failed to see the remand report of the respondents admitting to the fact of the applicant carrying on agricultural activity and earning income thereof, whereby the respondent is estopped from maintaining the appeal for inclusion of the said income of the applicant herein. The learned Senior counsel referred to the remand report, dated 25.01.2002 and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly stated that treating the entire income as 'non-agricultural' does not appear to be in-order and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], may consider the income as 'agricultural' to extent that he is satisfied and other issues may be decided on merits. Further, it is submitted that the Inspector of Income Tax, Virudhunagar, in his report, dated 30.03.1999, has stated that he made discreet enquiry in and around Devadanam Village with regard to ownership of the agricultural lands to the extent of 36 acres and agricultural operations thereon and all the 36 acres are nanja lands and fertile in nature and the lands are actually owned by K.Dhanushkodi and his son D.Muthukumar and these lands have been leased out to the applicant for a five year term commencing from 23.09.1994. The Inspector of Income Tax forwarded the statements recorded from the landowners along with the lease agreement and the statement of the watchman of land in question. Further, the Inspector of Income Tax stated that he had contacted the Village Administrative Officer of North Devadanam Village to ascertain the information regarding ownership of the land and the person to whom, the lands were leased to and the Village Administrative Officer, after verification of the Adangal Register issued a certificate to the effect that the lands belong to Mr.K.Dhanushkodi, and his son D.Muthukumar and the same has been leased out to the applicant. Further, it is submitted that the CIT(A) in his order, after taking note of the factual position, held that the action of the Assessing Officer treating the income as 'non-agricultural income' is not in-order and that he is not able to reason out as to how the Assessing Officer came to a conclusion that the said income represented 'unaccounted income' of the applicant's husband, when there was no evidence on record even to suggest so. Therefore, the CIT (A) held that there is no reason to dispute the claim of the applicant that she earned agricultural income during the years. It is further submitted that this Court while dismissing the appeals relied only on the order passed by the Tribunal, which is nothing, but the extract of the assessment order and did not take into consideration the remand report and the detailed enquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer, pursuant to the remand direction. Further, it is submitted that it is a settled legal position that appeal will not lie before the Tribunal, when the order of the CIT(A) is based on consideration of the remand report of the Assessing Officer. Further, this Court ought to have considered that jurisdictional facts cannot be assumed, when particularly, the appeal is not maintainable before the Tribunal, since the remand report admits agricultural income on the basis of fresh enquiry made by the Assessing Officer in pursuance to the direction of the CIT(A). Further, the learned Senior counsel referred to the factual findings recorded by the CIT(A) based upon the remand report and the report of the Inspector of Income Tax and submitted that factually, it has been established that the applicant's case merits acceptance.