LALNUNSIAMA HMAR,AIZAWL, MIZORAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILCHAR, ASSAM

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. 133 & 134/GTY/2026 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Lalnunsiama Hmar………………………..………………….………...Appellant A-47, Laizawn Colony Saron Veng Aizawl, Mizoram-796001 [PAN: ACZPH8353E] vs. ITO, Ward-1, Silchar………………….…..………………..……..…..Respondent Assam-788001 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 11, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 13, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: These two appeals have been filed by the same assessee against the separate orders passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], both dated 12.01.2026, for the assessment years 2015-16 & 2016-17, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’], arising out of the separate assessment orders framed u/s 147/144 of the Act. Since common issues are involved in both the appeals, therefore, appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. First, we take up ITA No.133/GTY/2026 for the assessment year 2015-16.

ITA Nos.133 & 134/GTY/2026 Lalnunsiama Hmar; A.Ys: 2015-16 & 2016-17 2. Brief facts of the case are that, for the assessment year 2015-16, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.54,11,000/- u/s 69A of the Act. The assessee challenged the validity of reopening as well as the approval granted u/s 151 of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 3. Still aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notices from the Registry. Therefore, we proceeded to hear the matter with the assistance of the Ld. DR, who supported the order of the authorities below. 4. We, after hearing the submissions of the Ld. DR and perusing the material available on record. We noticed that the assessee is stated to be residing in a specified area and has claimed exemption u/s 10(26) of the Act. However, the authorities below have not properly examined the applicability of the provisions of section 10(26) of the Act to the facts of the present case. Considering the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to restore the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of the claim of the assessee u/s 10(26) of the Act, after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall furnish all relevant documents in support of the claim before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, ITA No.133/GTY/2026 is allowed for statistical purposes. Since the issues involved in ITA No.134/GTY/2026 are identical to the issues decided in ITA No.133/GTY/2026 for the assessment year 2015-16, our findings and directions rendered therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA No.134/GTY/2026 as well. Accordingly, this appeal is also allowed for statistical purposes.

ITA Nos.133 & 134/GTY/2026 Lalnunsiama Hmar; A.Ys: 2015-16 & 2016-17 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 13th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 13.05.2026. DP, PS 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