INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TEZPUR, TEZPUR vs. PHURPA TSERING, ARUNACHAL PRADESH

ITA 281/GTY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 September 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) relied on evidence submitted for the first time on appeal without affording the AO an opportunity to verify it, violating Rule 46A. To ensure natural justice, the matter was remitted back to the AO for a fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 1,85,72,000/- under section 69A. The CIT(Appeals) deleted this addition, relying on evidence submitted by the assessee for the first time on appeal. The Revenue contended that this violated Rule 46A as the AO was not given an opportunity to verify the evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting the addition based on evidence submitted for the first time on appeal without allowing the AO to verify it, and whether the assessee, being a Scheduled Tribe member, is eligible for exemption under Section 10(26).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 250,Section 10(26)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-GUWAHATI ‘e-COURT’, DB, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),

1 Phurpa Tsering National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 24.02.2026 passed for Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →