9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inding will be applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeal wherever it is applicable. ITA No.1869/Mum/2023 Ground No.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -NFAC, Delhi erred in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 765,553 made by the assessing officer (being 1% of total credit amount in the bank accounts of the appellant not operated by him) without considering the fact that the appellant had not handled the bank operations for which the addition is made and also without considering the reality, the age, background/status, circumstances and the facts of the case of the appellant and ignoring that the appellant was only handler or conduit of his employer Mr. Hitesh G Shah the op ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that assessing officer has received information from the ADIT (Investigation) Unit 5(3), Mumbai that assessee has credited total amount of Rs. 765,55,253/- in the bank account in the name of various proprietorship concerns and assessee had also received contracts of Rs. 5,75,000/- from two contract awarding parties as per ITD system. Since, assessee has not filed return of income, therefore, considering the facts, the case of the assessment was reopened by issuing of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2016. On query, the assessee explained that assessee was acting on behalf of his employor Mr. Hitesh G. Shah, without any actual dealing in goods and services. The assessee submitted that he had neither signed any contract nor signed any bill ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee and all the bank accounts were handled by his employer. However, because of association of the assessee with his employer in the bogus business activity the AO has estimated 1% of the total gross amount to the amount of Rs. 76,553/- as incentives in hands of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the ld. Counsel contended that assessee has already shown the impugned commission and incentives to the amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- received by the assessee from his employer for associating with his employer in his bogus business. Therefore, he submitted that further addition made on estimation basis in the hands of the assessee is not justified. After considering the above facts and findings of the assessing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h deposit to the amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- in the hands of the assessee as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 8. The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 9. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The AO accepted that assessee was not directly and fully involved in the running of two proprietary concern and the assessee was just acting as a benami person of his employer and the proprietary concern and bank accounts were controlled by his employer. Therefore, we consider because of association of the assessee in the bogus business activity of his employer addition of 15% of such cash deposit to the extent of Rs. 2,25,000/- would be appropriate. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
