Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals arose from orders passed by the NFAC for AY 2016-17 and 2017-18. The assessee argued that the lower authorities dismissed the appeals without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing and producing evidence.
Held
The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard and to produce evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing and production of evidence, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & 51/GTY/2026 (Assessment Years:2016-17 & 2017-18) TumjomTato, 4th Floor, Amos Parlour I.T.O., Building, Near KV No. 1, C- Ward-North Lakhimpur. Vs. Sector, Naharlagum Circle, Papum Pare, Naharlagun- 791110 (Arunachal Pradesh) (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AQQPT 1296 F Assessee by : Shri Anil Kumar Agarwal, FCA Revenue by : Shri Amit Kumar Pandey, JCIT Date of hearing: 13/03/2026 Date of pronouncement: 13/03/2026 O R D E R
PER: BENCH
The present appeals filed by the assessee arise from orders dated 19/11/2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short, “the Act”) by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short, “the Ld. CIT(A)] for the A.Y. 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively. Since these appeals relating to same assessee and are involving common issues, therefore, these are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. We would first take up the appeal A.Y. 2016-17.
Tumjom Tato Vs ITO 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It was a submission that the assessee could not produce sufficient evidences before the Assessing Officer and before the ld. CIT(A). It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidences to substantiate his claim.
In reply, ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate his claim by providing relevant documents. Even the assessee has also failed to produce the evidences as required by the ld. CIT(A) and in absence of the same, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It was submitted by the ld. AR that he will provide all the details and evidences before the ld. CIT(A). This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file ld. CIT(A), for adjudicating afresh on merit after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard to substantiate its case. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. CIT(A), by producing all the details and evidences as are required in support of the claim.
In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
Tumjom Tato Vs ITO 6. Now we take for the A.Y. 2017-18. Since the issue raised in this appeal is substantially similar as decided by us in A.Y. 2016-17, therefore, our decision in for the A.Y. 2016-17 would mutatis mutandis apply to this appeal as well. Consequently, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13/03/2026.