"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Avijit Roy C/o, S. N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Floor, Suite No. 203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700 001. (PAN: AHEPR1969G) Vs ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Somnath Ghosh & Shri Sarnath Ghosh, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06.03.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide Order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056036741(1) dated 13.09.2023 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2017-18. 2 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 2. Shri Somnath Ghosh & Shri Sarnath Ghosh, Advocates appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Add. CIT, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. Appeal of the assessee is time barred by 50 days. At the time of hearing according to the prayer of the assessee and explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal, we condoned the delay in filing the appeal and accepted the appeal for hearing. 4. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee is in the business of commission agent, trading in old vehicles and having some partnership income. It was the submission that there was a deposit of Rs. 9,00,000/- each on two dates i.e. on 15.11.2016 and 21.11.2016. These were demonetized currencies. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer held that the amount of Rs. 18 lakh deposited by the assessee in the demonetized currency was stated as unexplained cash credit on the ground that the cash deposit did not match with the normal pattern of business habit of the assessee and that the source of cash deposit remains doubtful. It was the submission that on appeal before the ld. CIT(A), he confirmed the addition on account of the fact that assessee was unrepresented before the Ld. CIT(A). It was the submission of the Ld. AR berfore us that the copy of the cash book for the relevant period reads as follows: 3 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 4 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 5 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 6 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 5. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the cash book was before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR has also filed an unsigned cash flow chart for the period 01.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 which reads as follows: 7 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 6. It was the submission that the cash deposit is out of the cash available with the assessee and, therefore, no addition u/s. 69 of the Act is liable to be made. 7. In reply, the Ld. CIT, DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that there is no evidence to show that the cash book was submitted before the Assessing Officer much less a cash flow chart as it was the submission that the same may be sent for verification. It was the submission that he suspected the cash book has been fraudulently prepared. 8. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that as per the cash book, the assessee is having Rs.65,35,514/- as cash available as on 01.11.2016, there is no other deposit in the bank account in respect of the demonetized currency except for the two entries on 15.11.2016 and 21.11.2016. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the cash book and the cash flow chart are directed to be placed before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall examine whether such cash book and cash flow have been placed before him in the course of original assessment and whether the cash book and cash flow 8 ITA No.5/KOL/2024 Avijit Roy, AY: 2017-18 presented now before the Tribunal are the same for which the same are being sent to Assessing Officer for verification. If it is found that the assessee has cash balance as on 01.11.2016 exceeding Rs. 18 lakh, then the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) shall stand deleted. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose with the directions given above. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 6th March, 2025 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Abhijit Roy 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "