JACINTA HONGRAY,DIMAPUR vs. ITO W-1 DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

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 No.82/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jacinta Hongray…………………………………………………..…..Appellant H.No. 407, Burma Camp Dimapur, Nagaland-797112 [PAN: AEFPH9479B] vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dimapur……..………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Nagaland-797116 Appearances by: Shri Kishor Jain, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 07, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 11, 2026

ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, in the case of the assessee, as per specific information available/ flagged by CBDT through the insight portal under the category of “RMS PAN cases” during the assessment year 2017-18. Since assessee did not filed return of income for the assessment year in question. On the basis of specific information, it was noticed that assessee made transaction with Allahabad Bank, Dimapur, where time deposits of Rs.99,00,000/- along with TDS u/s 194A of Rs.28,077/- was reflected. Accordingly, order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed followed by notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. In response to the

ITA No.82/GTY/2026; A.Y: 2017-18 Jacinta Hongray notice, u/s 148 of the Act, assessee filed return of income declaring total income as NIL. During the assessment proceedings, assessee stated that assessee is a Scheduled Tribe and her income is exempted. However, assessee furnished computation of income showing that agricultural income of Rs.13,50,000/- and interest income of Rs.28,077/-. The total income of the assessee was at Rs.13,78,077/- and claiming to the income as the exempt income u/s 10(26) and showing the total income as NIL. However, the Ld. Assessing Officer did not satisfy with the submissions made by the assessee and the Ld. Assessing Officer believed that the term deposit of Rs.99,00,000/- as unexplained investment within the meaning of section 69A of the Act along with variation of interest income of Rs.28,077/- added to the income of the assessee and determine the total income at Rs.99,28,077/-. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), where the appeal of the assessee was filed with considerable delay of 132 days and the Ld. CIT(A) has pleased to dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to delay in filing the appeal before him without looking into merit of the case. 4. Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that the assessee is a tribal residing in specified area and her income is exempted from payment of income tax. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and liable to set aside. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the decision of the authorities below and stated that assessee has failed to substantiate the claim before the Assessing Officer as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without looking into merit of the case.

ITA No.82/GTY/2026; A.Y: 2017-18 Jacinta Hongray 6. We, after hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that in the instant case of the assessee; the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order where the Ld. CIT(A) without looking into merit of the case simply on the issue of technicalities dismissed the appeal of the assessee, which is not in accordance with law. Even the contention of the Ld. AR is that the assessee is a Scheduled Tribe and earning her income from schedule area, therefore, assessee is entitled to get benefit u/s 10(26) of the Act. We, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we remand back the issue to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer with a direction to examine issue afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish supporting documents before the Assessing Officer and produce the Scheduled Caste Certificate along with supporting documents in order to substantiate the claim. 7. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 11th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 11.05.2026. 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