Prakashkumar Amratji Thakor Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad, considered the assessee’s appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2018-19. The Tribunal first condoned a delay of 103 days in filing the appeal after accepting the assessee’s explanation that the appeal could not be filed in time due to portal issues and the counsel’s absence from the country.
The assessee had filed a return declaring total income of ₹2,96,250. During scrutiny assessment under Sections 143(3) read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had admitted to carrying on a bogus billing business through Siddhi Trading Co. with the assistance of Shri Babulal Patel. As the assessee failed to furnish details of the said person and the Assessing Officer found substantial credits in the assessee’s bank accounts followed by cash withdrawals, the entire bank credits amounting to ₹31,74,50,788 were treated as unexplained income. The assessment was completed at a total income of ₹31,77,47,038.
The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that he acted only as a name-lender under the directions of Shri Babulal Patel and Shri Mahendra Patel, received a salary of ₹25,000 per month, and that all transactions in the four bank accounts were carried out by those persons. It was argued that the Assessing Officer incorrectly treated the entire bank credits as unexplained income without considering the corresponding debit entries and that, at the highest, only the commission earned by the assessee could be brought to tax. The assessee also requested that the matter be restored to the CIT(A) because the appeal had been dismissed for non-compliance.
