Baidyanath Dutta Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The dispute related to the addition of ₹2,31,00,415 as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act and an addition of ₹4,23,420 treated as unexplained income.
The assessee was a business correspondent of Bank of India. Based on information received through the Insight Portal under the e-verification scheme, 2021, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under Sections 147 and 148 of the Act. During the proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted total deposits of ₹2,41,08,740 in the assessee’s bank account. The return of income reflected income from life insurance and other activities, showing turnover of ₹10,08,325 and income under Section 44AD of ₹31,61,000. Observing a difference of ₹2,31,00,415, the Assessing Officer sought an explanation. Since there was no compliance from the assessee during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated the amount as unexplained money under Section 69A and added it to the assessee’s income. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the addition.
Before the Tribunal, certificates issued by Bank of India were produced. One certificate dated 21.03.2025 stated that the assessee was functioning as a business correspondent of the bank and was carrying out deposit and withdrawal transactions on behalf of the bank. The certificate explained that the assessee received money from customers on behalf of Bank of India, deposited the amounts into his account with the bank, and thereafter remitted the money to the bank’s account. Another certificate confirmed that the assessee had been appointed as a business correspondent since 15.12.2010 and was authorized to open savings bank accounts, recover loan accounts, and open term deposit accounts.
