NIKH SITA,NAHARALGUN vs. ITO WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – GUWAHATI BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 98 & 100/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2019-20 Nikh Sita……………………………………………….………...Appellant Private Residence, D Sector District Papum Pare, Naharlgun Arunachal Pradesh-791110 [PAN: AUQPS6621P] vs. ITO, Ward North, Lakhimpur ……………………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-787001 Appearances by: Shri Nirmal Ghorawat, AR, appeard on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 20, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 21, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: Both the appeals have been filed by the same assessee involving in different assessment orders. ITA No.98/GTY/2026 challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] dated 21.08.2025, which was arising from order dated 04.01.2024 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’] ITA No.100/GTY/2026 is arising out of order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13.08.2025 arising out of assessment order dated 02.01.2024 passed u/s 147 of the Act.

ITA Nos.98 & 100/GTY/2026 Nikh Sita Since, the issues involved are identical, expect the difference in the assessment orders, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that in ITA No.98/GTY/2026, there is a delay of 115 days in filing the appeal, similarly, in ITA No.100/GTY/2026, there is a delay of 116 days. In this connection, the assessee has filed condonation petition, supported by affidavit, explaining the reasons for such delay and prayed for condonation. Considering the submission of the Ld. AR and in the interest of justice, the delay in filing both the appeals is condoned, and appeals are admitted for adjudication. First, we take up ITA No.98/GTY/2026 as a lead case, and verdict of this apply mutatis mutandis to the ITA No.100/GTY/2026. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, as per record, the assessee did not filed return of income for the assessment year 2016-17, and based on the information available with the department, it was noticed that assessee had deposited sum of Rs.71,50,810/- in a bank account maintain with SBI during the year under consideration. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued, however, assessee did not file any return of income in response to the said notice. The Assessing Officer, therefore, completed the assessment u/s 147 of the Act by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.73,01,560/-. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) without adjudicating the issue on merit and dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay in filing the appeals, therefore, sustaining the assessment order. 5. Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the order

ITA Nos.98 & 100/GTY/2026 Nikh Sita passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, as appeal was dismissed without considering the merits of the case. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on the technical ground of delay, without adjudicating the issue on merit. In our considered view, such an order cannot be sustained, especially when the matter involve substantive addition. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, ITA No.98/GTY/2026 is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.100/GTY/2026 for the assessment year 2019-20, the facts and issues in these appeals are identical to those ITA No.98/GTY/2026, therefore, our findings and directions in ITA No.98/GTY/2026 shall apply mutatis mutandis to this appeal as well. Accordingly, ITA No.100/GTY/2026 is also allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 21st April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 21.04.2026. DP, PS

ITA Nos.98 & 100/GTY/2026 Nikh Sita Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches