Dakappagari Naveen Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
This appeal was filed by the assessee against the order dated 15.07.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2017–18. There was a delay of one day in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed a condonation petition supported by an affidavit, stating that due to technical issues, Form No. 36 could not be uploaded on 13.09.2024 and was successfully uploaded on 14.09.2024. After considering the explanation, the Tribunal condoned the delay.
Ground No. 1 was general in nature and required no specific adjudication.
Ground Nos. 2 and 3 concerned the rejection of books of account under section 145(3). The assessee, engaged in retail wine business, submitted before the Assessing Officer (AO) that though books were maintained manually, they could not be produced as the business had been closed. The AO noted that the assessee failed to produce books, bills, and vouchers in support of expenditure claimed. Consequently, the AO rejected the book results and estimated business income at 3% of the stock put to sale. The net stock put to sale was computed at Rs. 5,41,77,090 and 3% thereof was determined at Rs. 16,25,320. Since the assessee had admitted profit of Rs. 12,42,578 in the return, the difference of Rs. 3,82,742 was added, along with consultancy fee of Rs. 95,444, aggregating to Rs. 4,78,186. The Tribunal held that as the returned results were unsupported by books of account, there was no error in the CIT(A)’s decision to uphold rejection of books. Accordingly, Ground Nos. 2 and 3 were dismissed.
