DILING TATAK,PAPUM PARE vs. ITO, WARD- NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR
Facts
The assessee filed a Nil income return claiming a refund, but the Assessing Officer (AO) completed a Section 144 assessment due to non-response to notices, making significant additions to income and denying Section 10(26) benefit. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] dismissed the assessee's first appeal on grounds of delay, as it was filed beyond the statutory permissible time limit.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessment was under Section 144 and involved Section 10(26) of the Act. Considering the CIT(A)'s dismissal based on filing delay, the Tribunal set aside both the CIT(A)'s order and the original assessment order, remanding the case to the AO for fresh consideration after providing the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) due to delay in filing; Validity of Section 144 assessment and denial of Section 10(26) benefit without proper hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 144, Section 10(26)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, : GAUHATI BENCH : GUWAHATI
Before: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON’BLE & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, HON’BLE
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: GAUHATI BENCH : GUWAHATI In Virtual hearing BEFORE SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 277 / GTY / 2025 AY: 2022-13 Diling Tatak The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur P Sector Durga Puja Pandal Itanagar Circle, Papum Pare (Arunachal Pradesh) PIN- 791111 PAN: AVFPT6405Q (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee By: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR Department By: Shri Amit Kumar Pandey, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing: 26-11-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 08 -12-2025
ORDER PER MANOMOHAN DAS, JM The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the (“CIT(A)” dated 23.06.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Page 1 of 4
ITA NO. 277 / GTY / 2025 Diling Tatak -Vs- The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur AY: 2022-13 Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and pertains to the Assessment Year [AY] 2022-23. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has filed his return of income declaring Nil income claiming refund of RS. 53,35,500/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS to verify --- (i) Contract receipts, Fees or Commission Receipts (ii) Deduction from Income from Other Sources and (iii) Refund claim. Statutory notices were issued to the assessee by ld. Assessing Officer [AO] asking certain details from the assessee. However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices including show cause notice issued to him. Consequently, the ld. AO has completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act. The ld. AO has made addition of Rs. 1,22,32,94,327/- Rs. 8,94,22,815/- and Rs. 74,75,17,698/- to the total income of the assessee. The ld. AO has denied the benefit of section 10(26) of the Act also. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed 1st appeal before the 3. ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 23.06.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay in filing of the appeal. The ld. CIT(A) observed that, the service of the notice of demand mentioned in Form 35 is 19th March, 2024 and the assessee has filed appeal on 12th July, 2024 which is beyond statutory permissible time limit of 30 days. The ld. CIT(A) did not impress on the reason cited by the assessee as reason for delay in filing of the appeal. It was Page 2 of 4
ITA NO. 277 / GTY / 2025 Diling Tatak -Vs- The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur AY: 2022-13 observed that, unless proper explanation is offered, the appellate authority could not exercise its discretion in the proper perspective to advance substantial justice. 6. We observe that, the assessment order framed by the ld. AO is under section 144 of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee. The reason cited by the assessee as delay in filing of his appeal, was not accepted by the ld. CIT(A). 7. Since, the assessment order is under section 144 and the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) on the ground of delay in filing of the appeal, section 10(26) of the Act also involved in the matter, it is our considered opinion that, the case of the assessee should be remanded to ld. AO for consideration afresh. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 23.06.2025 as well as the assessment order dated 18.03.2024 and remand the case to ld. AO for consideration afresh. We direct ld. AO to reframe the assessment after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, we allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes only. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open court on this 08th day 9. of December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( Rakesh Mishra ) (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Judicial Member Date: 08 .12 .2025
Page 3 of 4
ITA NO. 277 / GTY / 2025 Diling Tatak -Vs- The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur AY: 2022-13 Copy forwarded to:- 1. Diling Tatak, P Sector Durga Puja Pandal, Itanagar Circle, Papum Pare, PIN- 791111 (Arunachal Pradesh) 2. The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur 3. The Pr. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard file By Order
Assistant Registrar ITAT, Guwahati / Kolkata
Page 4 of 4
