In this case, if the Assessee is only having agricultural income as only source of his income and he has shown same in the return of income, then in the assessment proceeding, if the Assessing Officer raised question about the quantity, quality, manpower, productions of agricultural produce, sale, transportation. Then Assessee has to produce all the details to demonstrate the agricultural income earned by the Assessee. If the Assessee fails to demonstrate the details of exempt income as agricultural income, then Assessing Officer can levy tax on the same income under section 68 as cash credit in the hands of the Assessee. Even if the same income is shown in the return of income and not deposited in the bank, then also provision of section 68 is applies to the Assessee. As the said section says any sum found credited in the books of accounts.

Note : In CIT v. Construction Engineers (2017) 249 Taxman 260 /297 CTR 220 /155 DTR 217 (J&K) (HC) allowing the appeal of the revenue, the Court held that ;since assessee did not furnish any sort of evidence with regard to alleged agricultural income addition was held to be justified . In Mahendrabhai B. Shrivastav v. ITO (2016) 158 ITD 755 / 181 TTJ 713 (2017) 152 DTR 72 (Ahd.)(Trib.) the Tribunal held though the assessee has shown the agricultural income but did not produce proof of any agricultural activity, creditworthiness of such creditor was not established. Addition was held to be justified . Each case to be tested on facts .

Dr. K. Shivaram Senior Advocate